MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117535605 · doi:10.6000/1929-6029.2025.14.82

Comparative Analysis of Parametric Survival Models in HIV Patient Data

2025· article· W7117535605 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bassant Elkalzah, Jude Opara, Shamshad Ur Rasool, Chinyere P. Igbokwe, Okechukwu J. Obulezi, Mohammed Elgarhy

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Statistics in Medical Research · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV-related health complications and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAkaike information criterionGompertz functionProportional hazards modelBayesian information criterionWeibull distributionSurvival analysisGoodness of fitParametric statisticsModel selectionConcordance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores the efficacy of four key parametric survival models-Weibull, Gompertz, Lomax, and Exponential-in assessing mortality risk among HIV-positive patients undergoing antiretroviral therapy (ART). The research examined a retrospective cohort of 2,794 individuals, noting 124 deaths (4.4%) and 2,670 censored cases (95.6%), utilizing time-to-event data. Each model was estimated using maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) and assessed using various model selection criteria, including the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) and the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC). The Gompertz distribution emerged as the best fit (AIC = 45,943.33; BIC = 45,961.58), followed by the Weibull model, while the Lomax and Exponential models showed higher AIC/BIC values and less stable fits. The optimized parameters for the Gompertz model were determined as l = 0.00316 and a = 1.77x10-6, indicating a gradually increasing hazard rate over time. Model adequacy was further confirmed using Cox-Snell residuals (via Nelson-Aalen cumulative hazard) and Cox-Snell residual Q-Q plots for diagnostic evaluation. The Gompertz model demonstrated the highest coefficient of determination (R2 = 0.9817), followed by the Weibull (R2 = 0.9168), while the Lomax and Exponential models both had lower R2 values (0.5989), underscoring the superior predictive capability of the Gompertz model. Additionally, Cox proportional hazards regression identified significant mortality predictors, such as age at ART initiation (HR = 1.05, p < 0.001), male sex (HR = 1.60, p < 0.01), and last recorded body weight (HR = 0.94, p < 0.001). In contrast, baseline CD4 count and WHO stage were not significant. The model’s concordance index (C = 0.85) indicated high predictive accuracy. This study is motivated by the ongoing variability in HIV survival outcomes despite the extensive use of ART. By comparing these parametric models, the research enhances the understanding of mortality dynamics, aiding clinicians and policymakers in selecting optimal model structures for precise survival prediction, improved ART program monitoring, and informed patient management.These findings highlight significant clinical implications for HIV care, identifying age at ART initiation, male sex, and lower body weight as mortality predictors,indicating where targeted actions are needed. The Gompertz model’s superior performance offers a robust method for the prediction of long-term survival, underlining the need for monitoring comorbidities and the management of treatment-related side effects. With this model, HIV programs will be better positioned to flag high-risk patients, time interventions more appropriately, and allocate resources to reduce preventable deaths among their aging populations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.046
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.120
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.245

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0460.120
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.231
GPT teacher head0.562
Teacher spread0.331 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Statistics in Medical ResearchSame topicHIV-related health complications and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207