MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389504545 · doi:10.1186/s12981-023-00582-4

Research priorities in HIV, aging and rehabilitation: building on a framework with the Canada-International HIV and Rehabilitation Research Collaborative

2023· article· en· W4389504545 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Kelly K. O’Brien, Francisco Ibáñez-Carrasco, Kelly Birtwell, Graeme Donald, Darren A. Brown, Andrew D. Eaton, Bakita Kasadha, Emma Stanmore, Natalie St. Clair‐Sullivan, Liam Townsend, Jaime H. Vera, Patricia Solomon

Bibliographic record

VenueAIDS Research and Therapy · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV-related health complications and treatments
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of ReginaPublic Health OntarioToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of Toronto
FundersNIHR School for Primary Care ResearchUniversity of TorontoCanada Research ChairsBritish HIV AssociationMiddlesex UniversityUniversity of WestminsterNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchUniversity of Memphis
KeywordsRehabilitationPsychological interventionMedicineStakeholderHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Community-based rehabilitationGerontologyNursingPublic relationsFamily medicinePolitical sciencePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In 2016, the Canada-International HIV and Rehabilitation Research Collaborative established a framework of research priorities in HIV, aging and rehabilitation. Our aim was to review and identify any new emerging priorities from the perspectives of people living with HIV, clinicians, researchers, and representatives from community organizations. METHODS: We conducted a multi-stakeholder international consultation with people living with HIV, researchers, clinicians and representatives of community-based organizations. Stakeholders convened for a one-day Forum in Manchester, United Kingdom (UK) to discuss research priorities via a web-based questionnaire and facilitated discussions. We analyzed data using conventional content analytical techniques and mapped emerging priorities onto the foundational framework. RESULTS: Thirty-five stakeholders from the UK(n = 29), Canada(n = 5) and Ireland(n = 1) attended the Forum, representing persons living with HIV or representatives from community-based organizations(n = 12;34%), researchers or academics(n = 10;28%), service providers(n = 6;17%), clinicians(n = 4;11%); and trainees(n = 4;11%). Five priorities mapped onto the Framework of Research Priorities across three content areas: A-Episodic Health and Disability Aging with HIV (disability, frailty, social participation), B-Rehabilitation Interventions for Healthy Aging across the Lifespan (role, implementation and impact of digital and web-based rehabilitation interventions) and C-Outcome Measurement in HIV and Aging (digital and web-based rehabilitation health technology to measure physical activity). Stakeholders indicated methodological considerations for implementing digital and web-based rehabilitation interventions into research and practice and the importance of knowledge transfer and exchange among the broader community. CONCLUSION: Results highlight the sustained importance of the Framework of Research Priorities and provide further depth and areas of inquiry related to digital and web-based rehabilitation interventions and technology aging with HIV.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.151
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.390 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIDS Research and TherapySame topicHIV-related health complications and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207