Cognitive Screening with the Italian International HIV Dementia Scale in People Living with HIV: A Cross-Sectional Study in the cART Era
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HANDs) continue to be a significant concern, despite the advancements in prognosis achieved through Combination Antiretroviral Therapy (cART). Neuropsychological assessment, recommended by international guidelines for HANDs diagnosis, can be resource-intensive. Brief screening tools, like the International HIV Dementia Scale (IHDS) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), are crucial in facilitating initial evaluations. This study aims to assess the Italian IHDS (IHDS-IT) and evaluate its sensitivity and specificity in detecting cognitive impairment in HIV patients. Methods: This cross-sectional study involved 294 patients aged ≥30 years, evaluated at the Immunology Unit of the University of Cagliari. Cognitive function was assessed using the MoCA and IHDS. Laboratory parameters, such as CD4 nadir, current CD4 count, and HIV-RNA levels, were also collected. Statistical analyses included Spearman’s correlation, Receiver Operating Characteristic analysis, and the Youden J statistic to identify the optimal IHDS-IT cut-off for cognitive impairment detection. Results: The IHDS and MoCA scores showed a moderate positive correlation (Spearman’s rho = 0.411, p < 0.0001). ROC analysis identified an IHDS-IT cut-off of ≤9, yielding an Area Under the Curve (AUC) of 0.76, sensitivity of 71.7%, and specificity of 67.2%. At this threshold, 73.1% of patients with MoCA scores below 23 also presented abnormal IHDS scores, highlighting the complementary utility of both cognitive assessment instruments. Conclusions: The IHDS-IT exhibited fair diagnostic accuracy for intercepting cognitive impairment, with a lower optimal cut-off than previously reported. The observed differences may reflect this study cohort’s demographic and clinical characteristics, including advanced age and long-lasting HIV infection. Further, longitudinal studies are necessary to validate these findings and to confirm the proposed IHDS cut-off over extended periods.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".