MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366235056 · doi:10.1097/qad.0000000000003570

Experiencing homelessness and progression through the HIV cascade of care among people who use drugs

2023· article· en· W4366235056 on OpenAlexaff
Hudson Reddon, Nadia Fairbairn, Cameron Grant, M‐J Milloy

Bibliographic record

VenueAIDS · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsBritish Columbia Centre on Substance UseUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute on Drug Abuse
KeywordsHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)MedicineGerontologyVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the longitudinal association between periods of homelessness and progression through the HIV cascade of care among people who use drugs (PWUD) with universal access to no-cost HIV treatment and care. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. METHODS: Data were analysed from the ACCESS study, including systematic HIV clinical monitoring and a confidential linkage to comprehensive antiretroviral therapy (ART) dispensation records. We used cumulative link mixed-effects models to estimate the longitudinal relationship between periods of homelessness and progression though the HIV cascade of care. RESULTS: Between 2005 and 2019, 947 people living with HIV were enrolled in the ACCESS study and 304 (32.1%) reported being homeless at baseline. Homelessness was negatively associated with overall progression through the HIV cascade of care [adjusted partial proportional odds ratio (APPO) = 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.49-0.63]. Homelessness was significantly associated with lower odds of progressing to each subsequent stage of the HIV care cascade, with the exception of initial linkage to care. CONCLUSIONS: Homelessness was associated with a 44% decrease in the odds of overall progression through the HIV cascade of care, and a 41-54% decrease in the odds of receiving ART, being adherent to ART and achieving viral load suppression. These findings support calls for the integration of services to address intersecting challenges of HIV, substance use and homelessness among marginalized populations such as PWUD.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.105
Threshold uncertainty score0.789

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.355 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations20
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIDSSame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207