High prevalence of abnormal menstruation among women living with HIV in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To measure the prevalence and correlates of abnormal menstruation among women living with HIV (WLWH) in Canada. METHODS: We used cross-sectional questionnaire data from the community-based Canadian HIV Women's Sexual and Reproductive Health Cohort Study (CHIWOS), which enrolled WLWH aged ≥16 from British Columbia (BC), Ontario, and Quebec. For this analysis, we excluded women >45 years, who had primary amenorrhea, were pregnant, on hormonal contraception, or who reported history of endometrial cancer, last menstrual period >12 months ago, or premature ovarian failure. The primary outcome was abnormal menstruation (Yes vs No) based on responses to five questions about menstrual regularity, frequency, volume, duration, and intermenstrual bleeding in the six months prior to interview. An exploratory multivariable logistic regression analysis examined independent correlates of abnormal menstruation. RESULTS: Of 1422 women enrolled, 521 (37%) met eligibility criteria. Overall, 55.9% (95% CI:52%-60%) reported abnormal menstruation. In adjusted analyses, abnormal menstruation was associated with having a biologic sister/mother who entered menopause before age 40 (AOR 5.01, 95%CI 1.39-18.03), Hepatitis B co-infection (AOR 6.97, 95%CI 1.52-31.88), current smoking (AOR 1.69, 95%CI 1.55-3.41); and currently taking antiretroviral therapy (ART) (AOR 2.36, 95%CI 1.25-4.45) compared to being ART-naïve. Women in BC had higher adjusted odds of abnormal menstruation (AOR 2.95, 95%CI 1.61-5.39), relative to women in Ontario and Quebec. CONCLUSIONS: Over half of WLWH in this analysis had abnormal menstruation. Correlates of abnormal menstruation include genetic, socio-behavioural factors (province of residence, smoking), Hepatitis B co-infection, and current ART use.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".