MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032868886 · doi:10.1097/coh.0b013e32834bcb36

Management of HCV and HIV infections among people who inject drugs

2011· review· en· W2032868886 on OpenAlexaff
Jason Grebely, Mark Tyndall

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in HIV and AIDS · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatitis C virus research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Hepatitis CIntensive care medicineTreatment as preventionHepatitis C virusPopulationFamily medicineImmunologyAntiretroviral therapyViral loadEnvironmental healthVirus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Despite a high burden of hepatitis C virus (HCV) and HIV infection among IDUs and the advent of effective therapies, assessment and treatment remain limited. The current review focuses on the management of HCV and HIV among IDUs, focusing particularly on recent strategies to enhance assessment, uptake and response to HCV and HIV treatment. RECENT FINDINGS: There are compelling data demonstrating that with the appropriate programs, treatment for HIV and HCV among IDUs is successful. However, assessment and treatment for HCV and HIV lags far behind the numbers of IDUs who could benefit from therapy, related to systems, provider and patient-related barriers to care. Strategies for enhancing assessment and treatment for HCV and HIV have been developed, including novel models integrating HCV/HIV care within existing community-based and drug and alcohol clinics, innovative methods for education delivery (including peer-support models) and directly observed therapy. SUMMARY: As we move forward, research must move beyond demonstrating that HCV and HIV infections can be successfully treated among IDUs. There is clear evidence that this is both feasible and effective. Novel strategies to enhance assessment, uptake and response to treatment should be evaluated among IDUs to elucidate mechanisms to enhance care for this underserved population.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.937
Threshold uncertainty score0.914

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations86
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in HIV and AIDSSame topicHepatitis C virus researchFrench-language works237,207