Health-related quality of life and its predictors among adults living with HIV/AIDS and receiving antiretroviral therapy in Pakistan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is considered to be the fourth 90 of UNAIDS 90-90-90 target to monitor the effects of combination antiretroviral therapy (ART). ART has significantly increased the life expectancy of people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA). However, the impact of chronic infection on HRQoL remains unclear, while factors influencing the HRQoL may vary from one country to another. The current study aimed to assess HRQoL and its associated factors among PLWHA receiving ART in Pakistan. Methods A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted among PLWHA attending an ART centre of a tertiary care hospital in Islamabad, Pakistan. HRQoL was assessed using a validated Urdu version of EuroQol 5 dimensions 3 level (EQ-5D-3L) and its Visual Analogue Scale (EQ-VAS). Results Of the 602 patients included in the analyses, 59.5% (n = 358) reported no impairment in self-care, while 63.1% (n = 380) were extremely anxious/depressed. The overall mean EQ-5D utility score and visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS) score were 0.388 (SD: 0.41) and 66.20 (SD: 17.22), respectively. Multivariate linear regression analysis revealed that the factors significantly associated with HRQoL were: female gender; age > 50 years; having primary and secondary education; > 1 year since HIV diagnosis; HIV serostatus AIDS-converted; higher CD 4 T lymphocytes count; detectable viral load; and increased time to ART. Conclusions The current findings have shown that PLWHA in Pakistan adherent to ART had a good overall HRQoL, though with significantly higher depression. Some of the factors identified are amenable to institution-based interventions while mitigating depression to enhance the HRQoL of PLWHA in Pakistan. The HRQoL determined in this study could be useful for future economic evaluation studies for ART and in designing future interventions.Other Information Published in: Quality of Life Research License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 See article on publisher's website: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-02771-y
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".