Prevalence of common mental disorders and sleep disorder among adolescents and young adults with HIV: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective Adolescents and young adults (AYA) with HIV are a population at high risk of experiencing mental issues and sleep disorder. We aim to summarise the global prevalence and risks of depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and sleep disorder among AYA with HIV. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources PubMed, Web of Science, Embase and PsycINFO were searched from inception to 3 August 2024. Eligibility criteria Observational studies reporting the prevalence of depression, anxiety, PTSD or sleep disorder among AYA with HIV and published in English were included. Reviews, case reports, conference papers, notes, editorials and non-observational research were excluded. Data extraction and synthesis Titles, abstracts and full texts were reviewed and screened, and data were independently extracted. A modified Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS) was used to evaluate study quality. Heterogeneity was assessed by I 2 statistics, and subgroup analysis was performed to identify the source of heterogeneity. The pooled prevalence and the risks of depression, anxiety, PTSD and sleep disorder by comparison with HIV-uninfected peers were measured with random-effects and fixed-effects models. Publication bias was examined using Egger’s correlation tests and funnel plot. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation was used to assess the certainty of evidence. Results 56 articles were included in the final analysis. According to the modified NOS, 13 (23.2%) studies were considered good, 38 (67.9%) were satisfactory and 5 (8.9%) were unsatisfactory. 51 studies including 21 735 AYA with HIV contributed data for the pooled prevalence of depression (28%, 95% CI 24% to 32%, I 2 =98.68%; low certainty evidence); 21 studies including 8021 cases contributed data for the pooled prevalence of anxiety (22%, 95% CI 17% to 27%, I 2 =98.35%; low certainty evidence); 9 studies including 3691 cases contributed data for the pooled prevalence of PTSD (12%, 95% CI 8% to 17%, I 2 =95.60%; low certainty evidence); and 4 studies including 1909 cases contributed data for the pooled prevalence of sleep disorder (51%, 95% CI 31% to 70%, I 2 =98.37%; low certainty evidence). Compared with AYA without HIV, those with HIV had a higher risk of depression (OR=2.67, 95% CI 1.63 to 5.90, I 2 =84.0%), anxiety (OR=1.89, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.69, I 2 =50.3%), PTSD (OR=1.58, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.04, I 2 =40.1%) and sleep disorder (OR=2.11, 95% CI 1.51 to 2.95, I 2 =0.0%). A subgroup analysis found that studies conducted in Asia had a lower prevalence of depression (21.7% vs 29.6%, p<0.001) and anxiety (14.7% vs 21.9%, p<0.001) than studies conducted in Africa. Egger’s test indicated that there was significant publication bias in the estimates of the prevalence of depression (p<0.001), anxiety (p<0.001) and PTSD (p=0.049), but not in the estimates of the prevalence of sleep disorder (p=0.861). Conclusions AYA with HIV are a population at high risk of experiencing depression, anxiety, PTSD and sleep disorder. More sensitive screening strategies and more comprehensive intervention methods are needed. However, in view of the high heterogeneity, the differences between studies need to be considered and the pooled estimates interpreted with caution.
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 | 0.019 | 0.046 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.024 | 0.042 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".