Male gender predicts mortality in a large cohort of patients receiving antiretroviral therapy in Uganda
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Because men in Africa are less likely to access HIV/AIDS care than women, we aimed to determine if men have differing outcomes from women across a nationally representative sample of adult patients receiving combination antiretroviral therapy in Uganda. METHODS: We estimated survival distributions for adult male and female patients using Kaplan-Meier, and constructed multivariable regressions to model associations of baseline variables with mortality. We assessed person-years of life lost up to age 55 by sex. To minimize the impact of patient attrition, we assumed a weighted 30% mortality rate among those lost to follow up. RESULTS: We included data from 22,315 adults receiving antiretroviral therapy. At baseline, men tended to be older, had lower CD4 baseline values, more advanced disease, had pulmonary tuberculosis and had received less treatment follow up (all at p < 0.001). Loss to follow up differed between men and women (7.5 versus 5.9%, p < 0.001). Over the period of study, men had a significantly increased risk of death compared with female patients (adjusted hazard ratio 1.43, 95% CI 1.31-1.57, p < 0.001). The crude mortality rate for males differed importantly from females (43.9, 95% CI 40.7-47.0/1000 person-years versus 26.9, 95% CI 25.4-28.5/1000 person years, p < 0.001). The probability of survival was 91.2% among males and 94.1% among females at 12 months. Person-years of life lost was lower for females than males (689.7 versus 995.9 per 1000 person-years, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In order to maximize the benefits of antiretroviral therapy, treatment programmes need to be gender sensitive to the specific needs of both women and men. Particular efforts are needed to enroll men earlier into care.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".