ArticleAnnals of medicine2025
Tracking symptom dynamics in people living with HIV on different treatment: a longitudinal cross-lagged panel network analysis.
Article in Annals of medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo characterize dynamic interrelationships among physical, cognitive, and psychological symptoms in people living with HIV and identify bridge symptoms between subgroups receiving distinct antiretroviral therapy regimens.
methodsA longitudinal design was employed in this study. A total of 676 individuals diagnosed with HIV filled out the Self-Report Symptom Checklist (HIV-SRSC) at baseline, 3-month, and 6-month follow-ups in the clinic. We evaluated bridge symptoms-those that connect various communities-within longitudinal networks utilizing cross-lagged panel network analyses (CLPN).
resultsThe longitudinal networks presented differences and similarities between the Traditional Medication Regimen Group (TMR group) and the Novel Medication Regimen Group (NMR group). The expected influence of bridging symptoms in the CLPN predominantly centers on the cognitive symptom clusters, both in the TMR andNMR groups. However, the TMR group has stronger directional connections compared to the NMR group. 'Memory loss' (COGS3) demonstrates a bridging influence 1.62 (T1→T2) versus 1.51 (T2→T3) in the NMR group, and 'Having difficulty in concentrating' (COGS1) demonstrates a bridging influence 1.65 (T1→T2) versus 1.47 (T2→T3) in the TMR group. Nevertheless, physical symptoms, such as clusters related to gastrointestinal issues (PHYS12, PHYS13 and PHYS14), showed stable connections across both T1→T2 and T2→T3.
conclusionWhile TMR amplified cognitive-to-psychological symptom cascades, NMR fragmented cross-domain connectivity. These findings necessitate regimen-personalized interventions that preemptively target cognitive symptoms in TMR recipients while stabilizing bridge symptoms in NMR patients. Furthermore, cognitive dysfunction is a high-priority therapeutic target across all ART classes, which provides mechanistic evidence for ART-specific symptom management frameworks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.