British Columbia CARMA-CHIWOS Collaboration (BCC3): protocol for a community-collaborative cohort study examining healthy ageing with and for women living with HIV
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Women living with HIV (WLWH) experience accelerated ageing and an increased risk of age-associated diseases earlier in life, compared with women without HIV. This is likely due to a combination of viral factors, gender differences, hormonal imbalance and psychosocial and structural conditions. This interdisciplinary cohort study aims to understand how biological, clinical and sociostructural determinants of health interact to modulate healthy ageing in WLWH. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: tudy (CARMA-CHIWOS) Collaboration (BCC3) study will enrol WLWH (n=350) and sociodemographically matched HIV-negative women (n=350) living in British Columbia. A subset of BCC3 participants will be past participants of CARMA, n≥1000 women and children living with and without HIV, 2008-2018 and/or CHIWOS, n=1422 WLWH, 2013-2018. Over two study visits, we will collect biological specimens for virus serologies, hormones and biological markers as well as administer a survey capturing demographic and sociostructural-behavioural factors. Sociodemographics, comorbidities, number and type of chronic/latent viral infections and hormonal irregularities will be compared between the two groups. Their association with biological markers and psychostructural and sociostructural factors will be investigated through multivariable regression and structural equation modelling. Retrospective longitudinal analyses will be conducted on data from past CARMA/CHIWOS participants. As BCC3 aims to follow participants as they age, this protocol will focus on the first study visits. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the University of British Columbia Children's and Women's Research Ethics Board (H19-00896). Results will be shared in peer-reviewed journals, conferences and at community events as well as at www.hivhearme.ca and @HIV_HEAR_me. WLWH are involved in study design, survey creation, participant recruitment, data collection and knowledge translation. A Community Advisory Board will advise the research team throughout the study.
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 | 0.017 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.049 | 0.011 |
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".