Impact of the HIV infection in Hodgkin lymphoma individuals: A protocol for systematic review and meta analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) is a rare lymphoproliferative disorder that occurs in about 10% of all cancer cases. Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) is associated with an increased occurrence of a wide range of cancers, including HL due to progressive immunosuppression and co-infection with oncogenic viruses. However, the aim of this systematic review is to obtain evidence about the impact of the HIV infection in HL individuals. METHODS: We will obtain studies through PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, CENTRAL, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases. The inclusion criteria will be observational studies (sectional, cohort, and case-control) that describe the impact of the HIV infection in HL individuals. Outcomes of interest include mortality, prevalence, causes of hospitalization, time between HIV diagnosis and HL diagnosis in days, comorbidities (systemic hypertension, diabetes mellitus, metabolic syndrome, others), T CD4 + cells/mm3 at HIV diagnosis and at HL diagnosis, viral load (log10 copies/mL) at HL diagnosis, and history of treatment abandon. Two reviewers, independently, will extract the data from each included study. Meta-analysis will then be carried out using fixed-effects or random-effects model, using the mean difference for continuous outcomes and the relative risk for dichotomous outcomes. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The quality of evidence for each outcome will be assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. Review Manager V.5.3.5 will be used for synthesis and subgroup analysis. To assess heterogeneity, we will compute the I2 statistics. Additionally, a quantitative synthesis will be performed if the included studies are sufficiently homogenous. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study will be a review of the published data, and thus it is not necessary to obtain ethical approval. The findings of this systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021289520.
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 | 0.072 | 0.125 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.020 | 0.030 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.052 | 0.004 |
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".