Diet quality, food insecurity and risk of cardiovascular diseases among adults living with HIV/AIDS: a scoping review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are the single greatest contributor to global mortality. The successful introduction and scale-up of antiretroviral therapy (ART) delivered a reduction in HIV mortality. Consequently, an association was found between the scale-up of ART and an increased prevalence of comorbidities among people living with HIV (PLWH) such as hypertension and dyslipidaemia. A higher quality diet can delay the onset of comorbidities related to HIV infection. Diet quality and its methods of assessment are not fully established among PLWH. This review will identify the diet quality and food insecurity indices that have been used among PLWH and how these constructs are associated with risk of developing CVD. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The frameworks recommended by Arksey and O'Malley and the Joanna Briggs Institute's manual for conducting scoping reviews will be adopted. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines will be used for reporting. A search strategy was developed using keywords related to the topic. A preliminary MEDLINE (via PubMed) search was conducted on 11 November 2020 to develop a comprehensive search strategy. The final search will be conducted on PubMed, EbscoHost, Scopus, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases. Titles and abstracts of retrieved records will be screened independently by two reviewers. Data will be extracted from records that meet the inclusion criteria using a predesigned charting tool. Discrepancies in decisions made by reviewers will be resolved by consensus or the decision of a third reviewer. Extracted data will be presented in tables or charts. A descriptive summary of the charts or tables will follow. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for a scoping review. Findings will inform other studies currently underway and will be presented at conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals. REGISTRATION NUMBER: https://osf.io/7k3ja.
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 | 0.076 | 0.062 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.016 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.020 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.073 | 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".