AIDS cases in Ottawa: A review of simultaneous HIV and AIDS diagnoses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objectives In Canada, HIV diagnoses continue unabated, with many of these cases being identified at a late stage of infection. While current public health surveillance data does not capture timing of diagnoses, locally, we identified a number of patients concurrently diagnosed with AIDS and HIV. Design To understand the key characteristics, presenting symptoms, and risk factors associated with an AIDS diagnosis, we undertook a prospective chart review of HIV and AIDS diagnoses in Ottawa, Canada. Sample Sixty seven charts of persons diagnosed with HIV and AIDS between 2015 and 2021 were reviewed. Measurements Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results Results show some inconsistencies regarding HIV risk factors identified in published literature compared to those for persons diagnosed with AIDS in this study. Namely, patients in this review were more likely to be male, Black (from HIV‐endemic regions), and heterosexual, and were diagnosed at critical stage in infection (total average CD4+ count of 92.9 cells/mm3) with 44.8% of patients concurrently diagnosed with one or more AIDS‐related opportunistic infections. Conclusions The findings can be applied to strengthen HIV screening efforts in primary care settings, particularly among patients who present with persistent symptoms or illnesses related to chronic HIV infection. Additional considerations should be made for public health nurses to provide counseling and linkage to HIV testing/prevention services for patients at the time of an STI or Tuberculosis diagnosis and to increase AIDS‐specific data collection.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.018 | 0.023 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".