Predictive Factors of Detectable Viral Load in HIV-Infected Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite availability of effective antiretroviral therapy (ART), many HIV patients still have a detectable viral load (VL). Predictive factors of detectable VL are not well documented. This study was done at two large multidisciplinary HIV outpatient clinics at the Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM) and the McGill University Health Centre (MUHC). This is a retrospective case-control study of patients treated between 2016 and 2018. Cases had a VL ≥50 copies/mL in 2018. Controls had an undetectable VL from 2016 to 2018. Matching was based on gender and year of HIV diagnosis. Primary objective was to identify predictive factors of detectable VL. Secondary objectives included to identify predictive factors of virologic failure, low persistent viremia, and viral blip. A forward stepwise model selection by the Akaike Information Criterion of the conditional logistic regression was used to identify predictive factors. Two hundred cases were identified and matched with 200 controls. The cohort was mostly male (68.0%) with a median age of 54 years (21-83 years). Among cases, viral blip was the most common type of detectable VL (43.0%). The strong predictive factors for a detectable VL were adherence to ART and seeking health care services. Asylum seekers were less at risk of detectable VL. Adherence to ART was the only strong predictive factor for virologic failure. Three main predictive factors of detectable VL were identified in two ambulatory clinic hospitals in Montreal. Ascertaining these factors will allow for identification of patients more at risk of detectable VL.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".