FROM AWARENESS TO ADOPTION: THE EFFECT OF AIDS EDUCATION AND CONDOM SOCIAL MARKETING ON CONDOM USE IN TANZANIA (1993–1996)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper uses retrospective event-history data covering a four-year period to examine the timing of exposure to HIV/AIDS education and social marketing condom promotion campaigns, relative to the timing of changes in sexual risk behaviour in Tanzania. Analysis of the event-history data shows that the process of exposure to AIDS education messages and exposure to brand advertising for Salama brand condoms was very different. While exposure to AIDS education was early and gradual, exposure to Salama brand condoms started later, but was much more rapid. After one year of advertising, over half of the target population had been reached by the Salama advertising campaign, mostly through newspapers, radio and television. During the study period, condom use increased from 15% at the beginning of 1993 to 42% at the end of 1996. Increases in condom use were driven both by men who became sexually active, and by men who were not yet protected, or not fully protected. The results further show that it is uncommon for men who adopted condom use to return to more risky behaviour, which suggests that behaviour change in the study population is permanent.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".