MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078710517 · doi:10.1097/qai.0b013e31803151c7

Early Initiation of Antiretroviral Therapy

2007· review· en· W2078710517 on OpenAlexaff
Stephen D. Shafran

Bibliographic record

VenueJAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatitis C virus research
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoinfectionMedicineRibavirinPegylated interferonHepatitis CHepatitis C virusLiver diseaseInternal medicineMortality rateCohortImmunologyVirologyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Virus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Approximately 25% to 35% of HIV-infected persons in developed countries are coinfected with hepatitis C virus (HCV). HCV liver disease is accelerated by HIV coinfection, especially at low CD4 cell counts. Highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) dramatically reduces HIV-related mortality, and liver disease has emerged as a major cause of death in HIV/HCV-coinfected persons. Anti-HCV therapy with pegylated interferon plus ribavirin can cure HCV infection in up to 40% of coinfected patients; however, only approximately 10% of coinfected patients are considered candidates. Hence, HCV therapy cures approximately 4% of coinfected patients. Eleven cohort studies have shown that HAART is associated with a reduced rate of progression of HCV liver disease, and 4 of these studies have demonstrated a reduction in liver-related mortality. Although offering HCV therapy to the few eligible HIV/HCV-coinfected patients is important, early initiation of HAART in coinfected patients has a greater public health impact in reducing liver-related mortality than in curing HCV infection in approximately 4% of these patients.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.010

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 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

Citations34
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency SyndromesSame topicHepatitis C virus researchFrench-language works237,207