The use of the brief symptom inventory among youth living with HIV: a scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The brief symptom inventory (BSI), a 53-item measure that assesses psychological distress, is a popular tool for measuring mental health symptoms among youth living with HIV (YLH) in the United States (US); however, it has been used inconsistently with this population. This scoping review summarizes discrepancies in the use of the BSI to identify opportunities to improve systematism and make recommendations for clinicians and researchers, and highlights correlates of psychological distress among YLH as measured by the BSI. Databases searched included PsycINFO, PubMed, and CENTRAL. Eligible studies that assessed psychological distress using the BSI among YLH, were conducted in the US, and were written in English. Of the 237 articles identified, 57 were selected for inclusion. Studies investigated associations between BSI scores and several variables, including pre- versus post-highly active antiretroviral therapy (ART) era, ART adherence, sexual risk behavior, substance use, stigma, social support, self-efficacy, mode of HIV infection, and sexual orientation. There was variation in BSI elements used as outcome measures, sample age ranges, and reporting of mean scores and cutoff t-scores. 89.5% (n = 51) of studies did not report which BSI norms were used in their data analysis, and 68.4% of studies (n = 39) did not report the cut-off t-score value used. Variability in study objectives restricted this study to a scoping review rather than a meta-analysis. Generalizability to non-US settings is another limitation. More consistency in how the BSI is used among YLH is needed to accurately identify distress among YLH and provide tailored interventions to address their unique challenges.
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 | 0.017 | 0.080 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.025 | 0.021 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".