MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032679401 · doi:10.2105/ajph.2008.137901

Association Between HIV-1 RNA Level and CD4 Cell Count Among Untreated HIV-Infected Individuals

2009· article· en· W2032679401 on OpenAlexafffund
Viviane D. Lima, Valeria Fink, Benita Yip, Robert S. Hogg, P. Richard Harrigan, Julio Montaner

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Public Health · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicHIV Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchInternational AIDS SocietyUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsViral loadMedicineHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)ImmunologyLentivirusAntiretroviral therapyVirologyCd4 t cellViral diseaseInternal medicineT cellImmune system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: We examined the significance of plasma HIV-1 RNA levels (or viral load alone) in predicting CD4 cell decline in untreated HIV-infected individuals. METHODS: Data were obtained from the British Columbia Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS. Participants included all residents who ever had a viral load determination in the province and who had never taken antiretroviral drugs (N = 890). We analyzed a total of 2074 viral load measurements and 2332 CD4 cell counts. Linear mixed-effects models were used to predict CD4 cell decline over time. RESULTS: Longitudinal viral load was strongly associated with CD4 cell decline over time; an average of 1 log(10) increase in viral load was associated with a 55-cell/mm(3) decrease in CD4 cell count. CONCLUSIONS: Our results support the combined use of CD4 cell count and viral load as prognostic markers in HIV-infected individuals before the introduction of antiretroviral therapy.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Public HealthSame topicHIV Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207