Resilience and psychosocial factors linked to symptom experience during the menopause transition for women living with HIV*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Women living with HIV (WLWH) are commonly symptomatic during perimenopause and menopause (≥1 y without menstruation), however, little is known of risks for symptoms and their timing. We analyzed these unwanted experiences to inform care. METHODS: WLWH (≥40 y) in the Canadian HIV Women's Sexual and Reproductive Health Cohort Study rated midlife experiences for seven symptoms and a symptom composite (from 0 to 21). Timing was categorized into four phases: i) perimenopause (flow in the last year), ii) 1-2 years from final menstrual period (FMP), iii) 2-5 years post-FMP; and iv) >5 years post-FMP. Resilience (standardized out of 100) was assessed based on Wagnild's Resilience Scale. Univariable/multivariable mixed effects linear regression assessed correlates of symptom intensity by composite score. RESULTS: Among 457 peri-/menopausal women mean age 54.7 (±6.6) over two time points (703 observations), 88% experienced ≥1 mild symptom; 75% were of moderate and 55% severe intensity. The most frequently reported symptoms were joint/muscle stiffness (67%), depressed mood (67%), and hot flashes (57%). After adjusting for reproductive phase, we found that women with greater resilience had fewer/lower intensity symptoms (symptom score 1.37 [2.30 to 0.44] lower; P = 0.004); those with depressive symptoms and recreational drug use (respectively) had more/higher intensity symptoms (scores 1.71 [0.61 to 2.82] [P = 0.002]; 2.89 [2.09 to 3.77] [P<0.001] higher). Symptoms were most intense in perimenopause and declined with increasing menopausal years (P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: WLWH experiences a high burden of midlife symptoms, decreased by resilience and most intense during perimenopause. Unwanted experiences were linked to psychosocial and behavioral factors. These data encourage HIV providers to adopt a bio-psychosocial approach to midlife management.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".