A Systematic Approach to the Treatment of HIV and Hepatitis C Virus Infection in the Inner City: A Canadian Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The treatment of injection drug users (IDUs) coinfected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) presents multiple challenges, many of which could be addressed by the development of directly observed therapy programs. This is made all the more feasible by the validation of once-daily treatment regimens for HIV. We have demonstrated that virological suppression can be achieved and maintained in as many as 80% of active IDUs who have received highly active antiretroviral therapy for 48 months. This approach has now been validated in first- and second-line therapy, as well as for the treatment of bacterial infections in this population, achieving therapeutic results similar to those reported in the general population. The model is now being applied to the treatment of HCV infection, focusing on patients with infection due to HCV genotype 2 or 3, in whom the likelihood of response may exceed 80%. Our ultimate goal is to ensure that, even in treating IDUs in the inner city, no patient is left behind.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".