Human immunodeficiency virus and mortality from coronavirus disease 2019: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Persons living with human immunodeficiency virus (PLWH) constitute a vulnerable population in view of their impaired immune status. At this time, the full interaction between HIV and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been incompletely described. Objective: The purpose of this study was to explore the impact of HIV and SARS-CoV-2 co-infection on mortality. Method: We systematically searched PubMed and the Europe PMC databases up to 19 January 2021, using specific keywords related to our aims. All published articles on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and HIV were retrieved. The quality of the studies was evaluated using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale for observational studies. Statistical analysis was performed with Review Manager version 5.4 and Comprehensive Meta-Analysis version 3 software. Results: A total of 28 studies including 18 255 040 COVID-19 patients were assessed in this meta-analysis. Overall, HIV was associated with a higher mortality from COVID-19 on random-effects modelling {odds ratio [OR] = 1.19 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.01–1.39], p = 0.03; I 2 = 72%}. Meta-regression confirmed that this association was not influenced by age ( p = 0.208), CD4 cell count ( p = 0.353) or the presence of antiretroviral therapy (ART) ( p = 0.647). Further subgroup analysis indicated that the association was only statistically significant in studies from Africa (OR = 1.13, p = 0.004) and the United States (OR = 1.30, p = 0.006). Conclusion: Whilst all persons ought to receive a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, PLWH should be prioritised to minimise the risk of death because of COVID-19. The presence of HIV should be regarded as an important risk factor for future risk stratification of COVID-19.
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 | 0.011 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.039 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".