Quality of life profile and psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L in HIV/AIDS patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We assessed health-related quality of life (HRQOL), its associated factors, and examined measurement properties of the EuroQol - 5 Dimensions - 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) in HIV/AIDS patients. METHODS: A cross-sectional multi-site survey was conducted in 1016 patients (age: 35.4 ± 7.0 years; 63.8% male) in three epicenters of Vietnam. Internal consistency reliability, convergent validity, and discriminative validity of the EQ-5D-5L and a visual analogue scale (VAS) were evaluated. Tobit censored regression models were used to identify predictors of HRQOL in HIV/AIDS patients. RESULTS: The mean EQ-5D-5L single index and VAS were 0.65 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) = 0.63; 0.67) and 70.3 (95% CI = 69.2; 71.5). Cronbach's alpha of five dimensions was 0.85. EQ-5D-5L has a good convergent validity with VAS (0.73). It discriminated patients at different HIV/AIDS stages, duration of ART, and CD4 cell count. Predictors of poorer HRQOL included being female, lower education level, unemployment, alcohol and drug use, CD4<200 cells/mL, and advanced HIV/AIDS stages. CONCLUSION: The EQ-5D-5L has good measurement properties in HIV/AIDS patients and holds potentials for monitoring ART outcomes. Integration of HRQOL measurement using EQ-5D-5L in HIV/AIDS clinical practice could be helpful for economic evaluation of HIV/AIDS interventions.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".