MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2317571019 · doi:10.1089/aid.2013.0163

The Role of At-Risk Alcohol/Drug Use and Treatment in Appointment Attendance and Virologic Suppression Among HIV <sup>+</sup> African Americans

2013· article· en· W2317571019 on OpenAlex
Chanelle J. Howe, Stephen R. Cole, Sonia Napravnik, Jay S. Kaufman, Adaora A. Adimora, Beth Elston, Joseph J. Eron, Michael J. Mugavero

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAIDS Research and Human Retroviruses · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineAttendanceInternal medicineQuartileConfidence intervalRelative riskSidaCohortHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Cohort studyImmunologyViral disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The causes of poor clinic attendance and incomplete virologic suppression among HIV(+) African Americans (AAs) are not well understood. We estimated the effect of at-risk alcohol/drug use and associated treatment on attending scheduled appointments and virologic suppression among 576 HIV(+) AA patients in the University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) 1917 Clinic Cohort who contributed 591 interviews to the analysis. At interview, 78% of patients were new to HIV care at UAB, 38% engaged in at-risk alcohol/drug use or received associated treatment in the prior year, while the median (quartiles) age and CD4 count were 36 (28; 46) years and 321 (142; 530) cells/μl, respectively. In the 2 years after an interview, half of the patients had attended at least 82% of appointments while half had achieved virologic suppression for at least 71% of RNA assessments. Compared to patients who did not use or receive treatment, the adjusted risk ratio (aRR) for attending appointments for patients who did use but did not receive treatment was 0.97 (95% confidence limits: 0.92, 1.03). The corresponding aRR for virologic suppression was 0.94 (0.86, 1.03). Compared to patients who did not receive treatment but did use, the aRR for attending appointments for patients who did receive treatment and did use was 0.86 (0.78, 0.95). The corresponding aRR for virologic suppression was 1.07 (0.92, 1.24). Use was negatively associated with attendance and virologic suppression among patients not in treatment. Among users, treatment was negatively associated with attendance yet positively associated with virologic suppression. However, aRR estimates were imprecise.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it