Cohort Profile: The Ontario HIV Treatment Network Cohort Study (OCS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Ontario HIV Treatment Network Cohort Study (OCS) is an observational, open dynamic cohort of people who are receiving medical care for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection in Ontario, Canada. Established in the mid-1990s, the OCS has its roots in AIDS activists' demands for research that would improve the quality of life of people living with HIV while respecting their privacy. It is a collaborative and community-driven study, including a Governance Committee made up of people with HIV and other stakeholders that evaluates analysis project proposals for community relevance and ethics. From 1995 to 2010, a total of 5644 participants were enrolled and 27,720 person-years of observation were accumulated; follow-up will continue until at least 2015. In the initial years of study, the focus was on clinical data from medical chart reviews. It has since evolved into a comprehensive study that collects extensive de-identified information on clinical, laboratory and psychosocial and behavioural measures based on medical chart abstractions, interviews using a standardized questionnaire and linkage with external administrative health databases in Ontario. Interested collaborators are encouraged to submit analysis project proposals as instructed on the study website (www.ohtncohortstudy.ca).
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".