MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011236400 · doi:10.1155/2013/470245

A Qualitative Study of Barriers to Enrollment into Free HIV Care: Perspectives of Never-in-Care HIV-Positive Patients and Providers in Rakai, Uganda

2013· article· en· W2011236400 on OpenAlex
Gertrude Nakigozi, Lynn Atuyambe, Moses R. Kamya, Fredrick Makumbi, Larry W. Chang, Neema Nakyanjo, Godfrey Kigozi, Fred Nalugoda, Valerian Kiggundu, David Serwadda, Maria J. Wawer, Ronald H. Gray

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBioMed Research International · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFogarty International CenterNational Institute of Mental HealthAfrican Population and Health Research CenterInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsSerostatusMedicineQualitative researchFamily medicinePsychological interventionDenialReferralThematic analysisStigma (botany)NursingHealth careHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)PsychiatryPsychologyViral load

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Early entry into HIV care is low in Sub-Saharan Africa. In Rakai, about a third (31.5%) of HIV-positive clients who knew their serostatus did not enroll into free care services. This qualitative study explored barriers to entry into care from HIV-positive clients who had never enrolled in care and HIV care providers. METHODS: We conducted 48 in-depth interviews among HIV-infected individuals aged 15-49 years, who had not entered care within six months of result receipt and referral for free care. Key-informant interviews were conducted with 12 providers. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcripts subjected to thematic content analysis based on the health belief model. RESULTS: Barriers to using HIV care included fear of stigma and HIV disclosure, women's lack of support from male partners, demanding work schedules, and high transport costs. Programmatic barriers included fear of antiretroviral drug side effects, long waiting and travel times, and inadequate staff respect for patients. Denial of HIV status, belief in spiritual healing, and absence of AIDS symptoms were also barriers. CONCLUSION: Targeted interventions to combat stigma, strengthen couple counseling and health education programs, address gender inequalities, and implement patient-friendly and flexible clinic service hours are needed to address barriers to HIV care.

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.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.812

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.395 · 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