HIV‐1 and intestinal helminth review update: Updating a Cochrane Review and building the case for treatment and has the time come to test and treat?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intestinal helminth infection activates and dysregulates the immune system and impacts the host's capacity to respond to illness. Such neglected tropical infections exact the greatest burden on resource-limited settings and there appears to be considerable overlapping epidemiology with HIV-1 and other high-burden infections and illnesses in such settings. Recent limited yet controlled RCT evidence suggests a potentially beneficial therapeutic effect when persons co-infected with soil-transmitted worms and HIV-1, are treated with albendazole. The positive impact on CD4+ counts and plasma RNA levels appears to delay HIV-1 progression. The evidence-base has been conflicting and the unequivocal evidence needed to support large-scale de-worming remains lacking. The recent RCT by Walson and colleagues provides the first real tantalizing evidence of a beneficial impact of worm treatment and adds to a prior Cochrane review that was inconclusive. Further controlled, longer duration and larger trial arm designs that are minimally biased and comparable, are needed to provide the conclusive evidence needed yet the case for de-worming in delaying high-burden illnesses such as HIV-1 has been made much stronger.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".