HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HAND) in a South Asian population - contextual application of the 2007 criteria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To estimate the prevalence of HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HAND) among HIV patients in a multiethnic South Asian population, describe the pattern of neurocognitive impairment in HAND and the factors associated with HAND. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey of HIV-positive outpatients and inpatients. SETTING: The sole referral centre for HIV/AIDS treatment in Singapore. PARTICIPANTS: Inclusion criteria were HIV positive, age between 21 and 80 years old and at least 3 years of education. Exclusion criteria included concomitant delirium, serious systemic disease or major psychiatric illness. 265 patients did not meet criteria or declined to participate. The final sample size was 132. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was cognitive impairment based on performance on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, International HIV Dementia Scale and Instrumental Activities of Daily Living. The secondary outcome measure was the classification of impairment based on the 2007 updated research nosology for HAND. RESULTS: The prevalence of HAND was 22.7% of which 70% (15.9% of total) were asymptomatic neurocognitive impairment, 23.3% (5.3% of total) were mild neurocognitive disorder and 6.7% (1.5% of total) were HIV-associated dementia. Increasing age (OR 1.104, 95% CI 1.054 to 1.155, p<0.001), less education (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.89, p<0.001) and low baseline CD4 count (OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.74, p=0.019) were associated with HAND. Delayed recall, language and abstract thinking were the domains most commonly affected, but impairment in visuospatial ability (RC 3.013, 95% CI 1.954 to 4.073, p<0.001) and attention (RC 2.205, 95% CI 1.043 to 3.367, p<0.001) were most strongly associated with HAND. CONCLUSION: HAND is common among HIV patients in a South Asian sample, most of whom are asymptomatic. Older patients with less education and severe illness at diagnosis are at highest risk of HAND. Delayed recall is most commonly affected, but visuospatial dysfunction is most strongly associated with prevalent HAND.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".