MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Differences in CD4 Cell Counts at Seroconversion and Decline Among 5739 HIV-1–Infected Individuals with Well-Estimated Dates of Seroconversion

2003· article· en· W2748171261 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueJAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicHIV Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsCascades (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeroconversionMedicineAntiretroviral therapyDemographyImmunologyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Internal medicineViral load

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We studied repeated measurements of CD4 cell counts on 5739 HIV-1-infected individuals with reliably estimated dates of seroconversion (SC) aged > or =15 years at SC prior to initiation of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) or AIDS using random effects models. Estimated CD4 cell count at SC differed significantly by sex, exposure group, and age, being higher in women, hemophilic men, and injection drug users (IDUs) as well as in those aged >40 years at SC. The rate of CD4 cell count decline did not differ significantly by sex; thus, differences between men and women were stable throughout the HIV-1 incubation period. There was a monotonic relationship between CD4 slopes and age at SC, with steeper slopes in older subjects. At 5 years after SC, the median difference in CD4 cell counts between the oldest (>40 years at SC) and youngest (16-20 years at SC) subjects was around 90 cells/microL. Mean rate of CD4 decline was significantly steeper in subjects diagnosed during acute infection. There was no evidence of a faster loss of CD4 cells in subjects who seroconverted after 1994. Apart from hemophilic men, who tended to have a steeper rate of CD4 decline on average, mean CD4 slopes did not differ by exposure category. These results suggest that before the initiation of HAART or other interventions based on immune status, consideration of demographic factors may be worthwhile.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.791

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations89
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency SyndromesSame topicHIV Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207