ArticlePloS one2026
Machine learning prediction of weight gain after antiretroviral therapy initiation in people with HIV: Insights from a large french real-world cohort.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Excessive weight gain after initiation of antiretroviral therapy (ART) has become a recognized concern among people living with HIV. Individual weight trajectories remain highly heterogeneous and challenging to predict using conventional methods. We leveraged the French Dat'AIDS national cohort to assess whether machine learning (ML) could enhance the prediction of individual body weight at 6, 12, and 24 months after ART initiation. Using 112 baseline variables encompassing demographic, clinical, laboratory, and treatment-related data, we trained XGBoost models and evaluated performance using root mean square error (RMSE), R², and mean prediction error. A simple benchmark model based on baseline weight was used for comparison. Among 24,014 eligible ART-naïve adults, the ML models achieved RMSEs of approximately 4.6 kg, 5.3 kg, and 6.4 kg at 6, 12, and 24 months respectively, with declining predictive power over time. Baseline weight (Weight_M0) consistently emerged as the strongest predictor, while other factors contributed minimally. Although ML marginally outperformed the benchmark (Weight_M0), accuracy remained insufficient for clinical decision-making. Sensitivity analyses excluding individuals with implausibly large monthly weight changes modestly improved RMSE (3.9-6.0 kg), underscoring the impact of data quality. Our results demonstrate that, despite large sample size and rich clinical variables, ML lacks the precision necessary for individual weight forecasting in this context. These findings highlight the limitations of applying artificial intelligence to heterogeneous real-world cohorts and underscore the need to incorporate behavioral and lifestyle factors to improve predictive modeling.
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.