Gait Speed, Mobility, Balance, and Dual-Tasking Deficits Among People Living With HIV Globally: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: People living with HIV (PLWH) may experience premature physical deficits, including walking, mobility, and balance problems. The purpose was to measure deficits in walking, mobility, balance, and dual tasking in PLWH. The secondary objective was to make recommendations regarding the use of rehabilitation outcome measures. CINAHL, PubMed, and SPORTDiscus databases were searched. Two independent reviewers screened titles/abstracts and full-text articles, extracted data, and performed a quality assessment. Fifty-six articles with 14,053 PLWH and 8,454 uninfected controls were included. A meta-analysis revealed significantly worse performance among PLWH on the five times sit to stand mobility test versus controls (Cohen d = 0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI 0.08-1.29], p = .03). Meta-analyses revealed no differences between PLWH and controls for usual gait speed (Cohen d = -0.47, 95% CI [-1.10 to 0.15], p = .14) and fast gait speed (Cohen d = -0.39, 95% CI [-0.87 to 0.08], p = .10). Ten of 12 studies comparing PLWH with controls found differences in balance outcomes. PLWH have significantly worse mobility than uninfected controls.
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 | 0.006 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.018 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".