MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409154973 · doi:10.1097/coh.0000000000000943

Frailty in people with HIV: a geriatric syndrome approach to aging with HIV

2025· review· en· W4409154973 on OpenAlexaff
Alice Zhabokritsky, Julian Falutz

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in HIV and AIDS · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV-related health complications and treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGerontologyFrailty syndromeQuality of life (healthcare)GeriatricsOperationalizationHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)ComorbidityFrailty IndexPsychiatryFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Older persons with HIV (OPWH) are at risk of earlier onset of age-related comorbidities and common geriatric syndromes, notably frailty. The purpose of this review is to provide an update on recent developments related to frailty in OPWH, particularly as they relate to common co-occurrence of frailty with other geriatric syndromes which have an adverse impact on health outcomes. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies reliably demonstrate that frailty co-occurs with other geriatric syndromes due to common biologic risk factors. They often have an equal or greater impact on mortality and quality of life (QoL) compared to age-related comorbidities. Frailty is potentially reversible and risk factors for progression to or regression from a state of frailty have been identified. Importantly, HIV and Aging care centers have been initiated based on proven geriatric-based principles and frail OPWH should be referred. The role of agism and stigmatization are identified as contributors to states of frailty. SUMMARY: Recent findings focus on the important role geriatric syndromes especially frailty play in determining QoL in OPWH and this has led to efforts to operationalize frailty screening methods and to develop appropriate management protocols to limit or delay the impact of frailty on health.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.856
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.316 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in HIV and AIDSSame topicHIV-related health complications and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207