MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989174964 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v1n2p62

Issues and Challenges of HIV/AIDS Prevention and Treatment Programme in Nepal

2009· article· en· W1989174964 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sharada Prasad Wasti, Padam Simkhada, Julian Randall, Edwin van Teijlingen

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Economic growthPublic relationsMedicineService delivery frameworkService (business)Political scienceBusinessFamily medicineMarketingEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores some of the key issues and challenges of government HIV/AIDS prevention and treatmentprogramme in Nepal. Providing HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment services in Nepal is associated with a number ofissues and challenges which are shaped mostly on cultural and managerial issues from grass root to policy level.Numerous efforts have been done and going on by Nepal government and non-government organization but still HIVprevention and treatment service is not able to reach all the most at risk populations because cultural issues andmanagerial issues are obstructing the services. The existing socio-cultural frameworks of Nepal do not provide anenvironment for any safe disclosure for person who is HIV infected. Thus, there is an urgent need to address thoseissues and challenges and strengthen the whole spectrums of health systems through collaborative approach to achievethe millennium development goals. It will be the purpose of this paper to contribute to the policy makers by exploringthe pertinent issues and challenges in the HIV/AIDS programme.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0090.005
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.359 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations20
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health ScienceSame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207