Neurocognitive Development in Perinatally Human Immunodeficiency Virus–infected Adolescents on Long-term Treatment, Compared to Healthy Matched Controls: A Longitudinal Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A cross-sectional analysis of the Neurological, cOgnitive and VIsual performance in hiv-infected Children cohort showed significant cognitive impairment in combination antiretroviral therapy (cART)-treated, perinatally human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected adolescents (PHIV+) compared to age-, sex-, ethnicity- and socioeconomic status (SES)-matched HIV-negative controls (HIV-). In this longitudinal study, we compared cognitive development in the same adolescents over time. METHODS: We repeated the standardized cognitive test battery after a mean of 4.6 years (standard deviation 0.3). In participants who completed both assessments, we compared cognitive trajectories between groups in the domains of intelligence quotient (IQ), processing speed, working memory, executive functioning, learning ability, and visual-motor function, using linear mixed models. We explored associations with disease- and treatment-related factors and used multivariate normative comparison (MNC) to determine the prevalence of cognitive impairment. RESULTS: There were 21 PHIV+ and 23 HIV- participants that completed 2 assessments and were similar concerning age, sex, ethnicity, and SES. Compared to HIV- participants, in PHIV+ participants the IQ score increased significantly more over time (group*time 6.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.5-10.50; P = .012), whereas executive functioning decreased significantly more (group*time -1.43 z score, 95% CI -2.12 to -0.75; P < .001), resulting in the disappearance and appearance of significant differences. Processing speed, working memory, learning ability, and visual-motor function trajectories were not statistically different between groups. Univariately, those who had started cART at an older age deviated more in executive functioning (-0.13 z score, 95% CI -0.24 to -0.02; P = .043). The prevalence of cognitive impairments by MNC was similar in both groups, at both time points. CONCLUSIONS: The cART-treated PHIV+ adolescents appeared to have similar global cognitive development, compared to their healthy peers. Executive functioning trajectory appears to deviate, potentially explained by earlier brain damage.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".