Early Initiation of Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapies for Aids: Dynamic choice with Endogenous and Exogenous Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Criteria for initiation of highly active antiretroviral treatments (HAART) in HIV-infected patients remain a matter of debate world-wide because short-term benefits have to be balanced with costs of these therapies, and restrictions placed on future treatment options if resistant viral strains develop. On the other hand, postponing the introduction of HAART may involve a therapeutic opportunity cost if a patient's health is allowed to deteriorate to such an extent of becoming unable to benefit from new treatments currently under development when they become available. We introduce a two period model where period one treatment adoption is an irreversible act with future, but uncertain, consequences. New information, both endogenous and exogenous, arises over time and shapes the conditions surrounding the second period therapeutic decision. A surprising result is that, under conditions that appear close to those surrounding the HAART debate, the magnitude of the feared resistance effect has no effect on leaves the optimal treatment decision as far as it is high enough. Le bien-fondé d'administrer précocement des traitements antirétroviraux à haute activité (HAART) aux personnes infectées par le VIH reste objet de débats dans le monde, car leurs bienfaits à court terme peuvent compromettre les traitements futurs si se développent des souches résistantes du virus. Par ailleurs retarder le recours aux HAART comporte un coût d'opportunité thérapeutique si la santé du patient se dégrade au point qu'il ne peut plus bénéficier par la suite des traitements encore en cours de développement. Nous formulons un modèle à deux périodes où l'adoption du traitement de première période est irréversible et engage le futur, alors que des informations et connaissances nouvelles, exogènes et endogènes, déterminent les conditions entourant la décision thérapeutique de deuxième période. Paradoxalement, sous des conditions reflétant bien les enjeux du recours aux HAART, il s'avère que l'effet résistance éventuel a d'autant moins de chance d'importer pour la décision optimale, que sa gravité est élevée.
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 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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".