MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995368468 · doi:10.1080/13698570500042272

Risk construction in the reinfection discourses of HIV-positive men

2005· article· en· W1995368468 on OpenAlexaffabout
Barry D. Adam, Winston Husbands, James Murray, John C. Maxwell

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Risk & Society · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Health and Long Term CareAIDS Committee of TorontoUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNexus (standard)Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)IncentiveSalientSafer sexGender studiesSocial psychologyPsychologyMedicineSociologyPolitical scienceImmunologyCondomEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interviews with HIV-positive gay and bisexual men in Toronto show a widespread attentiveness to the question of HIV reinfection or super-infection as a concern in safer sex decision-making. Examination of HIV reinfection discourses shows how sero-positive men find themselves at the nexus of expert knowledge and responsibilizing trends in relying on, interpreting, and extending medical evidence in constructing risk for self and others. While not an issue that overrides all others, reinfection concerns play a salient role among the reasons mentioned by those practising safe sex, and are often weighed against competing incentives and discourses by those who do not.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.637
Threshold uncertainty score0.449

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.355 · 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

Citations22
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Risk & SocietySame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207