Characteristics of US-Born Versus Foreign-Born Americans of African Descent With Chronic Hepatitis B
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is more common in African Americans than in white Americans. We compared the epidemiologic, clinical, and virological characteristics of US-born African Americans (USAAs) to those of foreign-born African Americans (FBAAs) with chronic hepatitis B. The adult cohort study of the Hepatitis B Research Network enrolls patients with HBV infection from 21 clinical sites in the United States and Canada. A total of 237 (15%) of the adult participants with chronic HBV infection that were enrolled from January 20, 2011, to October 2, 2013, were of African descent, including 57 USAAs and 180 FBAAs (76%). Compared with FBAAs, USAAs were older and more likely to have acquired HBV through sexual exposure, to be HBeAg-positive, to have higher HBV DNA levels, and to be infected with HBV genotype A2. FBAAs from West Africa were more likely to have elevated serum alanine aminotransferase (72% vs. 50%; P < 0.01) and higher HBV DNA levels (median, 3.2 log10 IU/mL vs. 2.8 log10 IU/mL; P = 0.03) compared with East African FBAAs. The predominant HBV genotype among West African FBAAs was E (67%), whereas genotypes A (78%) and D (16%) were common in East African FBAAs. Significant differences were found between USAAs and FBAAs, highlighting the need for tailored strategies for prevention and management of chronic HBV infection for African Americans.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".