Frailty: the current challenge for aging people with HIV
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Older adults account for the majority of people with HIV (PWH) in high-income countries and have increasingly complex clinical profiles related to premature aging. Frailty is an important geriatric syndrome affecting a minority of PHW. Frailty negatively affects PHW's clinical status and quality of life. This review will update care providers on the current state of frailty that limits the healthspan of PWH. RECENT FINDINGS: Ongoing low-level HIV replication in treated PWH leads to immune activation and chronic inflammation contributing to the destabilization of normally autoregulated physiologic systems in response to environmental and biologic challenges characteristic of frailty. Understanding these underlying mechanisms will determine potential intervention options. Potentially reversible risk factors that promote progression to and reversion from the dynamic state of frailty are being studied and will help prevent frailty. Simple assessment tools and treatment strategies for frailty are being adapted for aging PWH. SUMMARY: Insight into underlying biologic mechanisms and adapting proven geriatric principles of interdisciplinary care will inform the healthy aging of PWH.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".