Incidence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in people with HIV in Ontario, 1996–2015: a retrospective population-based cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Because of high smoking rates and HIV-related factors, people with HIV may be at high risk for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); however, population-based estimates of the incidence of COPD among people with HIV are lacking, particularly for women. We compared the incidence of COPD among Ontario adults aged 35 years or more with and without HIV between Jan. 1, 1996, and Dec. 31, 2015. METHODS: We conducted a population-based study using Ontario's health administrative databases. We compared the incidence of COPD between people with and without HIV using standardized incidence ratios and generalized estimating equations with a log link function. RESULTS: We identified 1849 people with HIV and 1 168 727 HIV-negative people who were newly diagnosed with COPD between 1996 and 2015. People with HIV were younger than HIV-negative people (mean age 49.7 [standard deviation 10.4] yr v. 62.2 [standard deviation 14.8] yr; standardized difference 0.98). Rates of COPD were higher among people with HIV than among HIV-negative people (10.4 v. 9.0 cases per 1000 person-years; standardized incidence ratio 1.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10 to 1.21; adjusted rate ratio 1.34, 95% CI 1.27 to 1.41). In sex-stratified analyses, rates of COPD were higher among men with HIV (adjusted rate ratio 1.32, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.40) and women with HIV (adjusted rate ratio 1.54, 95% CI 1.37 to 1.72) than among men and women without HIV. In a sensitivity analysis, smoking explained observed differences in COPD incidence. INTERPRETATION: People with HIV had higher rates of incident COPD than HIV-negative people. This may reflect the disproportionately higher prevalence of smoking among the former.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".