Neurocognitive evaluation using the International HIV Dementia Scale (IHDS) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment Test (MoCA) in an HIV‐2 population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We aimed to characterize neurocognitive impairment (NI) in an HIV-2 population using an observational cross-sectional study in four Portuguese hospitals. METHODS: Adult HIV-2-infected patients were included. Montreal Cognitive Assessment Test (MoCA) and International HIV Dementia Scale (IHDS) scales were applied for screening of NI. Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) scales were used for assessment of depression and functionality. A multivariate analysis was performed to assess for risk factors for NI. RESULTS: Eighty-one patients were included, 50.6% of African origin (n = 41) and 49.4% of Portuguese origin (n = 40). The MoCA scale showed alterations in 81.5% of patients (100% of migrants vs. 62.5% of non-migrants, P < 0.001) and the IHDS scale showed alterations in 42%. Both scales were altered simultaneously in 35.8%. Variables independently associated with NI were age [odds ratio (OR) = 0.885] and migrant status (OR = 9.150). CONCLUSIONS: Neurocognitive impairment (both scales altered) was present in 35.8%, which is comparable to what is described for HIV-1. The MoCA performed worse in the migrant population and might not be applicable in this setting.
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".