MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3026706740 · doi:10.1186/s12981-020-00276-1

Survival of people aged 50 years and older by HIV and HIV treatment status: findings from three waves of the SAGE-Wellbeing of Older People Study (SAGE-WOPS) in Uganda

2020· article· en· W3026706740 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph Mugisha Okello, Stephen Nash, Paul Kowal, Nirmala Naidoo, Somnath Chatterji, Ties Boerma, Janet Seeley

Bibliographic record

VenueAIDS Research and Therapy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV-related health complications and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNational Institute on AgingWorld Health Organization
KeywordsSAGEMedicineHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)GerontologyPsychiatryFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Data on the survival status of older adults on antiretroviral treatment (ART) are scarce in sub-Saharan Africa. The objective of this study was to determine the survival status of people aged 50 years and older who were HIV-negative, HIV-positive not on ART, and HIV-positive on ART. METHODS: We used three waves of data from the World Health Organisation Study on Global Ageing and adult health- Well Being of Older People Study cohort in Uganda, conducted in 2009, 2012-2013 and 2015-2016. The cohort included HIV-negative and HIV-positive persons aged 50 years and older recruited from multiple rural and peri-urban sites in Uganda. Data were collected using interviewer-administered questionnaire. Time-dependent ART data were collected from medical records using a data-abstraction form. This study was conducted before the universal test and treat policy came into effect. We fitted Cox survival models to estimate hazard ratios to compare the risk of death between groups, adjusted for age, sex, marital status and hypertension. RESULTS: Of 623 participants, 517 (82.9%) of respondents had follow-up data and were included in this analysis. We observed 1571 person-years of follow-up from 274 people who were HIV-negative, and 1252 from 243 who were HIV-positive. The estimated mortality adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) was 1.89 (95% CI 1.0-3.4; p = 0.04) among people living with HIV compared to HIV-negative people. The aHR for mortality among people receiving ART compared with HIV-negative people was 1.75 (95% CI 0.9-3.5). People who were HIV-positive and not receiving ART had the greatest risk of death (aHR = 2.09, 95% CI 1.0-4.4 compared with HIV negative participants). The aHR for HIV-positive people not receiving ART, compared to those who were on treatment, was 1.19 (95% CI 0.6-2.5). CONCLUSION: Older adults living with HIV on ART had a risk of mortality that was nearly twice as high as HIV-negative adults. Further analyses of longitudinal data should be done to understand factors that affect the survival of older adults on ART.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.473

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.306 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIDS Research and TherapySame topicHIV-related health complications and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207