MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

P2-S6.13 Gay men's assessment of sexual and social risks in the context of a recent HIV-positive diagnosis

2011· article· en· W1984060656 on OpenAlexaffabout
Daniel Grace, Michael Kwag, Malcolm Steinberg, Michael L. Rekart

Bibliographic record

VenueSexually Transmitted Infections · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHIV/AIDS Impact and Responses
Canadian institutionsBC Centre for Disease ControlSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Context (archaeology)HomosexualityGynecologySexual behaviorMale HomosexualityFamily medicineClinical psychologyMen who have sex with menGender studiesSyphilis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Technological innovations in HIV testing that allow for the diagnosis of very recently-acquired HIV infections provide opportunities to understand sexual and social risk perceptions before and after an HIV-positive diagnosis. Longitudinal interviews with a group of gay men who have received an early or acute HIV diagnosis represent an important opportunity to understand risk assessment beyond individual-level paradigms of risk analysis and to broaden our understanding of social and structural risk factors associated with HIV infection, diagnosis and disclosure. Methods Study recruitment is being conducted through six clinical sites in British Columbia, Canada (April 2009—December 2012) by the CIHR Team in the Study of Acute HIV Infection in Gay Men. Participants (n=12 at time of analysis) completed a series of self-administered questionnaires and semi-structured face-to-face interviews. Baseline qualitative interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed. A thematic analysis, informed by a social organization of knowledge perspective, was conducted. Results Three interrelated domains of risk assessment emerged from the interviews. First, we explicate how men calculated the epidemiological or sexual risks of transmitting HIV before and after their diagnosis, and how such an assessment informed their sexual behaviours. Second, men described a myriad of experienced and perceived social risks, such as stigma and rejection, associated with the disclosure of their HIV-status to their family, friends, colleagues and intimate partners. Third, men identified potential problems with technologies of status notification which create a set of institutional risks related to the processes by which patients learn of their HIV-positive status. The relationship between these textually-mediated fields of risk is examined. Conclusion A stratified conception of risk allows us to understand the everyday situations in which people assess HIV-related 'dangers' in their social and sexual lives. This formative research has important implications for educational campaigns on HIV transmission risk assessment for both HIV negative and positive gay men. This work can also inform counselling and support services to address how disclosure risks are negotiated during an early or acute HIV diagnosis. Important implications for clinical and public health practices, including how and when people are given their HIV diagnosis, are raised.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.574

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.074
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.230 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSexually Transmitted InfectionsSame topicHIV/AIDS Impact and ResponsesFrench-language works237,207