Neurocognitive and neuropsychiatric evaluation of individuals living with HIV compared to HIV uninfected individuals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to compare the neurocognitive function and neuropsychiatric symptoms of individuals living with HIV and HIV-negative controls, and to evaluate their associations with clinical markers of disease activity. The study included 111 HIV-positive individuals followed at Ankara City Hospital and 54 HIV-negative controls matched for age, sex, and educational level. All participants were assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), and the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI). Vitamin D levels were significantly higher in the control group than in the HIV-positive group (p = 0.043). Using a MoCA cut-off score of 21, the proportion of participants scoring ≥21 was significantly higher among controls (p = 0.036). No significant differences were observed between the groups in depression or anxiety scores (p > 0.05). Additionally, neurocognitive performance and psychiatric symptoms were not significantly associated with CD4 count or HIV RNA levels. These findings indicate that neurocognitive impairment remains prevalent among individuals living with HIV despite effective antiretroviral therapy. Although depression and anxiety levels did not differ between groups, regular neurocognitive and psychiatric assessments remain essential components of comprehensive HIV care, emphasizing the importance of multidisciplinary management.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".