Correlation between IgG Anti-Toxoplasmosis Gondii Antibodies and Cognitive Function in Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (HIV-AIDS) Patients with Cerebral Toxoplasmosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Patients with HIV-AIDS are at increased risk for both opportunistic infections, such as cerebral toxoplasmosis, and cognitive impairment. IgG anti-Toxoplasmosis gondii (T.gondii) is a marker for latent infection. However, its role in cognition in HIV patients remains unclear. The study aims to determine the correlation between Ig-G anti-T.gondii and each domain cognitive function in HIV patients with cerebral toxoplasmosis. Method: This was a cross-sectional study involving 110 HIV patients with cerebral toxoplasmosis who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. We assessed cognitive function using Montreal Cognitive Assessment Indonesian Version (MoCA-INA) and measured the IgG anti-T.Gondii using the ELISA method. The Spearman correlation test was used to determine the correlation between Ig-G anti-T.gondii with each cognitive domain. Results: There was a significant correlation between IgG anti-T.gondii and cognitive function. (p = 0.004, r = -0.275). There was also significant relation between IgG anti-T.gondii with attention (p = 0.046, r =-0.19), abstraction (p = 0.036, r = -0.2), and delayed recall (p = 0.047, r =-0.19). But there was no significant relation between Ig-G anti-T.gondii with visuospatial (p = 0.171), naming (p = 0.521), language (p = 0.810), and orientation (p = 0.11) Conclusion: Lower Level Of IgG Anti-Toxoplasmosis Gondii Antibodies Is Associated With Worse Cognitive Function In Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (HIV-AIDS) Patients with Cerebral Toxoplasmosis
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".