MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2561340932 · doi:10.1186/s12879-016-2017-x

Impact of peer support on virologic failure in HIV-infected patients on antiretroviral therapy - a cluster randomized controlled trial in Vietnam

2016· article· en· W2561340932 on OpenAlexaff
Anders Sönnerborg, Vu Van Tam, Ziad El‐Khatib, Michele Santacatterina, Gaetano Marrone, Nguyễn Thị Kim Chúc, Vinod Diwan, Anna Thorson, Nicole K. Le, Phạm Nhật An, Mattias Larsson

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Infectious Diseases · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue
FundersCenters for Disease Control and PreventionStyrelsen för Internationellt Utvecklingssamarbete
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineNevirapineViral loadRegimenRandomized controlled trialLamivudineClinical endpointAntiretroviral therapyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)ImmunologyVirus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The effect of peer support on virologic and immunologic treatment outcomes among HIVinfected patients receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART) was assessed in a cluster randomized controlled trial in Vietnam. METHODS: Seventy-one clusters (communes) were randomized in intervention or control, and a total of 640 patients initiating ART were enrolled. The intervention group received peer support with weekly home-visits. Both groups received first-line ART regimens according to the National Treatment Guidelines. Viral load (VL) (ExaVir™ Load) and CD4 counts were analyzed every 6 months. The primary endpoint was virologic failure (VL >1000 copies/ml). Patients were followed up for 24 months. Intention-to-treat analysis was used. Cluster longitudinal and survival analyses were used to study time to virologic failure and CD4 trends. RESULTS: Of 640 patients, 71% were males, mean age 32 years, 83% started with stavudine/lamivudine/nevirapine regimen. After a mean of 20.8 months, 78% completed the study, and the median CD4 increase was 286 cells/μl. Cumulative virologic failure risk was 7.2%. There was no significant difference between intervention and control groups in risk for and time to virologic failure and in CD4 trends. Risk factors for virologic failure were ART-non-naïve status [aHR 6.9;(95% CI 3.2-14.6); p < 0.01]; baseline VL ≥100,000 copies/ml [aHR 2.3;(95% CI 1.2-4.3); p < 0.05] and incomplete adherence (self-reported missing more than one dose during 24 months) [aHR 3.1;(95% CI 1.1-8.9); p < 0.05]. Risk factors associated with slower increase of CD4 counts were: baseline VL ≥100,000 copies/ml [adj.sq.Coeff (95% CI): -0.9 (-1.5;-0.3); p < 0.01] and baseline CD4 count <100 cells/μl [adj.sq.Coeff (95% CI): -5.7 (-6.3;-5.4); p < 0.01]. Having an HIV-infected family member was also significantly associated with gain in CD4 counts [adj.sq.Coeff (95% CI): 1.3 (0.8;1.9); p < 0.01]. CONCLUSION: There was a low virologic failure risk during the first 2 years of ART follow-up in a rural low-income setting in Vietnam. Peer support did not show any impact on virologic and immunologic outcomes after 2 years of follow up. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01433601 .

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations15
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Infectious DiseasesSame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207