Fatigue in HIV/AIDS is Associated With Depression and Subjective Neurocognitive Complaints but not Neuropsychological Functioning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fatigue and depressive symptoms are common in HIV-infection. The relationship between these symptoms and neuropsychological functioning is poorly understood, particularly in symptomatic infection/AIDS. This study examined the associations among fatigue, depressive symptoms, subjective neurocognitive complaints, and objective neuropsychological performance in HIV/AIDS. Sixty-eight men with HIV-infection (27 adults with HIV-infection but not AIDS and 41 with AIDS diagnosis) completed a neuropsychological test battery and self-report measures of fatigue (Fatigue Severity Scale), depressive symptoms (Beck Depression Inventory), and subjective neurocognitive complaints (Patient's Assessment of Own Functioning). High levels of fatigue were endorsed by participants. Fatigue severity was related to depressive symptoms but not to AIDS diagnosis or medication status. Verbal learning and motor function was worse in participants with AIDS, but neuropsychological functioning was not significantly correlated with fatigue or depressive symptoms. Subjective neurocognitive complaints were predicted by both depressive symptoms and fatigue. Our results suggest that adults with fatigue and HIV-infection (with or without AIDS) should be screened for depression. Neither fatigue nor depressive symptoms appear to affect neuropsychological functioning in HIV/AIDS. Future research is needed to develop and evaluate instruments and methods to differentiate depression-related fatigue from fatigue that may reflect underlying medical disease. Such research will further the development of effective treatments for fatigue associated with HIV-infection.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".