The longitudinal impact of employment, retirement and disability status on depressive symptoms among men living with HIV in the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many persons living with HIV (PLWH) either reduced their employment capacity or stopped work completely due to disease progression. With the advent of effective antiretroviral therapy, some PLWH were able to return to the workforce and many are now transitioning into retirement. We examined the histories of employment, retirement and disability status on depression among 1,497 Participants living with HIV from 1997 to 2015 in the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study. Data were collected on depressive symptoms, employment, retirement, disability status as well as HIV-related and sociodemographic characteristics. Employment, retirement and disability status were lagged 2 years to assess whether the risk of depression at a given observation were temporally predicted by each respective status, adjusting for prior depressive symptoms and covariates. Being employed (aOR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.71-0.82) had lower odds of depression risk two years later compared to those unemployed. There were higher odds of depression risk associated with disability (aOR: 1.43; 95% CI: 1.32-1.54) versus those not on disability. Retirement status was not associated with the risk of depressive symptoms. These findings could help inform policies and employment programs to facilitate the return to work for PLWH who are willing and able to work.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".