Perceived risks and benefits of enrolling people with HIV at the end of life in cure research in Southern California, United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Although current antiretroviral therapy allows most people with HIV (PWH) to experience normal longevity with a good quality of life, an HIV cure remains elusive due to HIV reservoir formation within deep tissues. An HIV cure remains highly desirable to the community of PWH. This study reports on the perceived risks and benefits of participation in the Last Gift study, a study aimed at characterizing HIV reservoirs via post-mortem autopsy, among PWH at the end of life (EOL) and their next-of-kin (NOK)/loved ones. Methods: Last Gift participants (PWH with a terminal illness and/or near the end of life) and their NOK/loved ones were surveyed for perceptions of risks, benefits, and meaning for participation in the Last Gift study. Results: The average age of the 17 Last Gift participants was 66.6 years, 3 were females, 1 person identified as Hispanic, and 15 as Caucasian. The average age of the 17 NOK/loved ones was 56.7 years, and relationships to Last Gift participants included partner/spouse, sibling, friend, child, parent, grandparent, and nephew. The only perceived personal risk of the Last Gift among participants was the blood draws (3/17). NOK/loved ones perceived the following risks: blood draws (2/17), physical pain (3/17), worry that something bad will happen (2/17), and unpleasant side effects (1/17). Participants in Last Gift and NOK/loved ones indicated the study had various positive social effects. For both participants and NOK/loved ones, the most frequent perceived personal benefit of the Last Gift was the satisfaction of supporting HIV cure research. Discussion: Participants perceived minimal personal and societal risks and valued the altruistic benefits of participating in the Last Gift study. Last Gift participants and NOK/loved ones were cautious about possible personal risks of EOL HIV cure research but still viewed that the emotional, psychological and societal benefits of participation outweighed potential risks.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".