Differences in Presentation, Treatment Initiation, and Response Among Children Infected With Human Immunodeficiency Virus in Urban and Rural Zambia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Access to pediatric antiretroviral therapy (ART) in rural areas remains limited due to the unique challenges faced by providers and patients. Few rural ART programs have been evaluated to determine whether these challenges affect care and treatment response. METHODS: Routinely collected data from 3 pediatric ART programs in rural and urban Zambia were obtained from medical records. Participants included human immunodeficiency virus-infected children <15 years of age presenting for care between August 2004 and July 2008. Characteristics at presentation, time to ART initiation, and treatment response were compared between urban and rural children. RESULTS: A total of 863 children were enrolled (562 urban and 301 rural). At presentation, children in rural clinics were significantly younger (3.4 vs. 6.5 years), had higher CD4 T-cell percentages (18.0% vs. 12.8%), less advanced disease (47.5% vs. 62.3% in World Health Organization stage 3/4), lower weight-for-age Z-scores (-2.8 vs. -2.3), and traveled greater distances (29 vs. 2 km). Rural children eligible for ART at presentation took longer to initiate treatment (3.6 vs. 0.9 months); no differences were found in time to ART initiation among children ineligible at presentation (15.4 vs. 12.1 months). For the 607 children initiating ART, clinical and immunologic status improved in both urban and rural clinics. Mortality was highest in the first 90 days of treatment and was higher at all times in rural clinics. CONCLUSIONS: The findings support expansion of ART programs into rural areas to increase access to treatment services and reduce inequities.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".