Physical, Emotional, and Psychosocial Challenges Associated with Daily Dosing of HIV Medications and Their Impact on Indicators of Quality of Life: Findings from the Positive Perspectives Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To assess challenges with daily oral antiretroviral therapy (ART), we analyzed data for 2389 participants in the 2019 Positive Perspectives survey of people living with HIV in 25 countries. ART-related challenges reported included difficulty swallowing pills (33.1% [790/2389]); stress from daily dosing routine (33.3% [795/2389]); bad memories from daily intake of HIV medication (35.1%[839/2389]), and concern "that having to take pills every day means a greater chance of revealing my HIV status to others" (37.9% [906/2389]). Individuals who felt empowered by daily oral dosing ["taking my pill(s) every day reassures me that my HIV is being kept under control"] had 69% higher odds of optimal overall health (AOR 1.69, 95% CI 1.40-2.04). Conversely, odds of optimal overall health were lower among those who felt daily pill intake "limits my day-to-day life" (AOR 0.53, 95% CI 0.44-0.64). These findings show that there is need for increased flexibility of ART delivery to meet diverse patient needs.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".