Long-term HIV/AIDS survivors: Patients living with HIV infection retained in care for over 20 years. What have we learned?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individuals diagnosed with HIV before 1996 had poor prognoses. Few HIV care centers can track patients continuously from the 1980s to present. We determined the sociodemographic, clinical, and health care utilization characteristics of patients diagnosed and followed for >20 years (i.e. long-term HIV/AIDS survivors) to understand what factors contributed to survival. All HIV-positive patients diagnosed before 1996 were categorized as active, moved/lost, or died as of 1 January 2016. Baseline sociodemographic, clinical characteristics, antiretroviral therapy (ART) usage, retention, HIV care costs, and health status were analyzed. Of 876 patients, 49.5% died, 30.3% moved or left, 20.3% remained active in care for a median of 23.4 years. At diagnosis, continuously-followed patients were younger with a higher CD4 cell count, attended regular clinic visits at higher frequencies, and had received more ART than patients who moved or died. As of 1 January 2016, their median age was 57 years (interquartile range 53–62), 15% were aged >65 years, median CD4 cell count was 591 cells/mm 3 (475–863) with 68% >500 cells/mm 3 . Sixty-two percent remained employed. The total cost of HIV care was $32,251,030 (Cdn$); median cost per patient per year $15,418 ($13,697–$18,392). Individuals diagnosed prior to 1996 benefited from early diagnosis and engagement to care, regular follow-ups, and timely initiation of ART, strongly supporting the modern guidelines of care.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".