Patient activation among people living with HIV: a cross-sectional comparative analysis with people living with diabetes mellitus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Standardized self-management supports are an integral part of care delivery for many chronic conditions. We used the validated Patient Activation Measure (PAM®) to assess level of engagement for self-management from a sample of 165 people living with HIV (PLWH) and 163 people with diabetes. We conducted multivariable logistic regression to assess associations between demographics and PAM® scores. PLWH had high levels of activation that were no different from those of people with diabetes (mean score = 67.2, SD = 14.2 versus 65.0, SD = 14.9, p = 0.183). After adjusting for patient characteristics, only being on disability compared to being employed or a student was associated with being less activated (AOR = 0.276, 95%CI = 0.103-0.742). Our findings highlight the potential for the implementation of existing standardized chronic disease self-management programs to enhance the care delivery for PLWH, with people on disability as potential target populations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".