MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309522777 · doi:10.1177/09564624221108034

HIV care cascade for women living with HIV in the Greater Toronto Area versus the rest of Ontario and Canada

2022· article· en· W4309522777 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Priscilla Medeiros, Laura Warren, Mina Kazemi, Notisha Massaquoi, Stephanie Smith, Wangari Tharao, Lena Serghides, Carmen H. Logie, Abigail Kroch, Ann N. Burchell, Alexandra de Pokomandy, Angela Kaida, Mona Loutfy

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of STD & AIDS · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health CentreSt. Michael's HospitalToronto General HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkWomen's Health In Women's HandsPublic Health OntarioOntario HIV Treatment NetworkWomen's College Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanadian HIV Trials Network, Canadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineDemographyLogistic regressionPopulationCohortGerontologyCohort studyMen who have sex with menReproductive healthHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Environmental healthInternal medicineFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Greater Toronto Area (GTA) is home to 39% of Canada's population living with HIV. To identify gaps in access and engagement in care and treatment, we assessed the care cascade of women living with HIV (WLWH) in the GTA versus the rest of Ontario and Canada (in this case: Quebec and British Columbia). METHODS: We analyzed 2013-2015 self-reported baseline data from the Canadian HIV Women's Sexual and Reproductive Health Cohort Study for six care cascade stages: linked to care, retained in care, initiated antiretroviral therapy (ART), currently on ART, ART adherence (≥90%), and undetectable (<50 copies/mL). Multivariable logistic regression was used to reveal associations with being undetectable. RESULTS: Comparing the GTA to the rest of Ontario and Canada, respectively: 96%, 98%, 100% were linked to care; 92%, 94%, 98% retained in care; 72%, 89%, 96% initiated ART; 67%, 81%, 90% were currently using ART; 53%, 66%, 77% were adherent; 59%, 69%, 81% were undetectable. Factors associated with viral suppression in the multivariable model included: living outside of the GTA (Ontario: aOR = 1.72, 95% CI: 1.09-2.72; Canada: aOR = 2.42, 95% CI: 1.62-3.62), non-Canadian citizenship (landed immigrant/permanent resident: aOR = 3.23, 95% CI: 1.66-6.26; refugee/protected person/other status: aOR = 4.77, 95% CI: 1.96-11.64), completed high school (aOR = 1.77, 95% CI: 1.15-2.73), stable housing (aOR = 2.13, 95% CI: 1.33-3.39), income of ≥$20,000 (aOR = 1.52, 95% CI: 1.00-2.31), HIV diagnosis <6 years (6-14 years: aOR = 1.75, 95% CI: 1.16-2.63; >14 years: aOR = 1.87, 95% CI: 1.19-2.96), and higher resilience (aOR = 1.02, 95% CI: 1.00-1.04). CONCLUSION: WLWH living in the GTA had lower rates of viral suppression compared to the rest of Ontario and Canada even after adjustment of age, ethnicity, and HIV diagnosis duration. High-impact programming for WLWH in the GTA to improve HIV outcomes are greatly needed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.241

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of STD & AIDSSame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207