Osteonecrosis in Patients Infected With HIV
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of data on clinical epidemiology of osteonecrosis in HIV-infected patients. We aimed to describe patients' characteristics and natural history of this poorly known condition. METHODS: All cases of symptomatic HIV-related osteonecrosis diagnosed from 1990 through 2003 in 19 Spanish clinics were reviewed. Functional status at the last visit was assessed with the validated Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Index questionnaire. RESULTS: Of 54 patients analyzed, 29 (53.7%) had a single bone necrosis, and 25 (46.3%) had 2 or more sites involved. Progression of symptoms happened more often in patients with hip involvement (17/39 vs 0/8 patients; P = 0.019). Twenty patients (37%) required surgical intervention. Male sex and higher CD4 cell count were associated with surgery on multivariable analysis. Overall, at the end of the follow-up period, half of the patients had moderate to severe disability (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Index score > or =60). During a follow-up period of 137 person-years, only 2 new episodes of osteonecrosis were observed (rate of recurrences, 1.5/100 person-years; 95% confidence interval, 0.4-5.1). CONCLUSIONS: HIV-related osteonecrosis is associated with significant disability over time. Location of bone necrosis, sex, and CD4 cell count may influence the outcome. The risk for recurrences for patients who have experienced 1 episode is low.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".