Birth Weight and Preterm Delivery Outcomes of Perinatally vs Nonperinatally Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Infected Pregnant Women in the United States: Results From the PHACS SMARTT Study and IMPAACT P1025 Protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pregnancy outcomes of perinatally human immunodeficiency virus-infected women (PHIV) are poorly defined. METHODS: We compared preterm delivery and birth weight (BW) outcomes (low BW [LBW], <2500 g), small-for-gestational-age [SGA], and BW z scores [BWZ]) in HIV-exposed uninfected infants of PHIV vs nonperinatally HIV-infected (NPHIV) pregnant women in the Pediatric HIV/AIDS Cohort Study Surveillance Monitoring of ART Toxicities or International Maternal Pediatric Adolescent AIDS Clinical Trials P1025 studies. Mixed effects models and log binomial models were used to assess the association of maternal PHIV status with infant outcomes. Age-stratified analyses were performed. RESULTS: From 1998 to 2013, 2270 HIV-infected pregnant women delivered 2692 newborns (270 born to PHIV and 2422 to NPHIV women). PHIV women were younger, (mean age 21 vs 25 years, P < .01) and more likely to have a pregnancy CD4 count <200 cells/mm3 (19% vs 11%, P = .01). No associations between maternal PHIV status and preterm delivery, SGA, or LBW were observed. After adjustment, BWZ was 0.12 lower in infants of PHIV vs NPHIV women (adjusted mean, -0.45 vs -0.33; P = .04). Among women aged 23-30 years (n = 1770), maternal PHIV was associated with LBW (aRR = 1.74; 95% confidence interval, 1.18, 2.58; P < .01). CONCLUSION: The overall lack of association between maternal PHIV status and preterm delivery or infant BW outcomes is reassuring. The higher rates of LBW observed in PHIV women aged 23-30 years warrants further mechanism-based investigations as this is a rapidly growing and aging population worldwide. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: PHACS SMARTT study, NCT01310023. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: IMPAACT 1025, NCT00028145.
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 | 0.011 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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".