Experiences of work among people with disabilities who are HIV-positive in Zambia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper focuses on accounts of how having a disability and being HIV-positive influences experiences of work among 21 people (12 women, 9 men) in Lusaka, Zambia. In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted in English, Bemba, Nyanja, or Zambian sign language. Descriptive and thematic analyses were conducted. Three major themes were generated. The first, a triple burden, describes the burden of having a disability, being HIV-positive, and being unemployed. The second theme, disability and HIV is not inability, describes participants' desire for work and their resistance to being regarded as objects of charity. Finally, how work influences HIV management, describes the practicalities of working and living with HIV. Together these themes highlight the limited options available to persons with disabilities with HIV in Lusaka, not only secondary to the effects of HIV influencing their physical capacity to work, but also because of the attendant social stigma of being a person with a disability and HIV-positive.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".