A secondary analysis of depression outcomes from a randomized controlled trial of adjunctive sertraline for HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background : Depression is a risk factor for worse HIV outcomes in persons living with HIV/AIDS, including engagement-in-care, HIV medication adherence, and retention-in-care. Depression has a prevalence of more than three times as high as in the general population. Despite this, there are few randomized studies of antidepressants in HIV-infected Africans, including those with opportunistic infections. Methods: We enrolled 460 HIV-infected Ugandans with cryptococcal meningitis into a randomized clinical trial of adjunctive sertraline vs placebo (2015-2017). We defined depression using the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) score of >15, and severe depression as >26 at one and three months after meningitis diagnosis and initiation of treatment. We evaluated the relationship between sertraline and depression, as well as associations with persistent depression, at three months. Results: At one- and three-months post meningitis diagnosis, 62% (108/174) and 44% (74/169) of all subjects had depression (CES>15), respectively. At three months, sertraline-treated subjects had consistent risk for depression as placebo-treated subjects but were significantly less likely to have severe depression (CES>26) (OR 0.335; 95%CI, 0.130-0.865). Of those with depression at one month, sertraline-treated subjects were less likely than placebo-treated subjects to be depressed at three months (p=0.05). Sertraline was the only factor we found significant in predicting persistent depression at three months among those with depression at one month. Conclusions: Depression is highly prevalent in HIV-infected persons who have survived cryptococcal meningitis. We found that sertraline is associated with a modest reduction in depression in those with depression at baseline and a significant decrease in severe depression.
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 | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".