Include, differentiate and manage: gay male youth, stigma and healthcare utilization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Canada, there has been a recent increase in HIV incidence among young men who have sex with men. However, gay male youth (GMY) may forego HIV testing due to fear of stigmatization. Therefore, the aim of this research was to explore the perceptions of stigma in health care within this population. The research was conducted through a series of semi-structured interviews with eight GMY aged 20-29, who frequented a gay-friendly clinic in downtown Ottawa, Canada. In a sub-analysis of the interviews utilizing the work of Hardt and Negri's three-part sequence - inclusion, differentiation and management - we found that homosexuality-related stigmatization affects the interaction between GMY and health professionals. Interview participants perceived HIV-related risk counselling as a manifestation of stigma. These findings reveal that the experience of stigma and stigmatization is not necessarily based on health professionals' intentions, but rather, on patients' perceptions of the interactions they have with health professionals. Specific modifications to the delivery of health care may help to overcome stigmatization.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".