MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332416385 · doi:10.1080/09540121.2016.1146211

Mental health problems in people living with HIV: changes in the last two decades: the London experience 1990–2014

2016· article· en· W2332416385 on OpenAlexaff
Catherine E. Adams, Shilpa Zacharia, L. F. Masters, Caroline Coffey, Pepe Catalan

Bibliographic record

VenueAIDS Care · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsKensington Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthPsychiatryHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)AnxietyManiaMedicineComorbidityDepression (economics)PsychologyFamily medicineBipolar disorderMood

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mental health problems continue to be a significant comorbidity for people with HIV infection, even in the era of effective antiretroviral therapy. Here, we report on the changes in the mental health diagnoses based on clinical case reports amongst people with HIV referred to a specialist psychological medicine department over a 24-year period, which include the relative increase in depressive and anxiety disorders, often of a chronic nature, together with a decline in acute mental health syndromes, mania, and organic brain disorders. In addition, new challenges, like the presence of HIV and Hepatitis C co-infection, and the new problems created by recreational drugs, confirm the need for mental health services to be closely involved with the general medical services. A substantial proportion of people with HIV referred to specialist services suffer complex difficulties, which often require the collaboration of both psychiatrists and psychologists to deal effectively with their difficulties.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.186
Threshold uncertainty score0.370

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.311 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations49
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIDS CareSame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207