Determinants of risk-taking in HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Decision-making involves fronto-striatal brain areas that are particularly vulnerable to the effects of HIV infection. Some studies report impaired decision-making in people with HIV/AIDS with past or present addictions and/or accompanying HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HAND). The authors investigated risk-based decision-making in HIV/AIDS, separating individuals with or without accompanying HAND. METHOD: A total of 288 HIV-infected persons underwent standardized neuropsychological testing. Participants were profiled based on neuropsychological and clinical assessments into 2 groups, neurocognitively normal (NN, n = 205) and HAND (n = 83). Risk-based decision-making was assessed via the Game of Dice Task (GDT). Sample characteristics were summarized by principal component analysis (PCA) prior to regression analyses predicting GDT performance. RESULTS: The NN group performed within the normative range of the GDT, but the HAND group was impaired in all GDT measures. Across all participants, GDT performance was predicted by a combination of psychiatric comorbidities, alcohol abuse, education/premorbid IQ, and neuropsychological performance. Further analyses revealed marijuana use as an important additional predictor of impaired GDT performance. Within the GDT-impaired HAND group only, past or present immunosuppression emerged as the most robust predictor of GDT performance. Metabolic disorders and antiretroviral toxicity were also predictors of GDT performance in the HAND group. CONCLUSION: The majority of HIV-infected individuals were unimpaired in the GDT. Some influence of psychiatric and substance use comorbidities on GDT performance emerged in the entire cohort. However, GDT deficits were restricted to individuals with HAND, related to immunosuppression, metabolic disorders and antiretroviral toxicity in this group only. (PsycINFO Database Record
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".