HIV-associated neurocognitive disorder in HIV-infected Koreans: The Korean NeuroAIDS Project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: HIV-associated neurocognitive disorder (HAND) is an independent predictor of early mortality and is associated with many difficulties in activities of daily living. We sought to determine the prevalence of and risk factors for HAND in HIV-infected Koreans. In addition, we investigated the performance of screening tools and components of neuropsychological (NP) tests for diagnosing HAND. Methods: HIV-infected patients were enrolled consecutively from two different urban teaching hospitals in Seoul, South Korea between March 2012 and September 2012. Participants completed a detailed NP assessment of six cognitive domains commonly affected by HIV. The Frascati criteria were used for diagnosing HAND. Four key questions, the International HIV Dementia Scale (IHDS) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)-K were also assessed as potential tools for screening for HAND. Results: Among the 194 participants, the prevalence of HAND was 26.3%. Asymptomatic neurocognitive impairment and minor neurocognitive disorder accounted for 52.9 and 47.1% of the patients with HAND, respectively. In multivariate analysis, haemoglobin (Hb) level ≤13g/dL (P=0.046) and current use of a protease inhibitor-based regimen (P=0.031) were independent risk factors for HAND. The sensitivity and specificity of the IHDS were 72.6 and 60.8%, and those of MoCA-K were 52.9 and 73.4%, respectively. The IHDS (P<0.001) and MoCA-K (P<0.001) were both useful for screening for HAND. Among NP tests, the sensitivity and specificity of the Grooved Pegboard Test were 90.2 and 72.0%, and those of the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test were 61.2 and 84.4%, respectively. Conclusions: HAND is a prevalent comorbidity in HIV-infected Koreans. Active screening and diagnosis with effective tools, such as the IHDS, MoCA-K and Grooved Pegboard Test, could be used to identify this important complication. © 2014 British HIV Association.
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 | 0.006 |
| 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".