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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this paper is to explore the relationship between mandatory HIV testing and the institutional management of inmates in U.S. prisons. Mandatory HIV testing has been largely overlooked by the nursing community even though it has important human rights and ethical implications. Drawing on the work of Goffman (1990) on the inner workings of total institutions, the present article critically examines the deployment of mandatory HIV testing in U.S. prisons. To set the stage, we define mandatory HIV testing and describe the methods of HIV testing currently used in U.S. prison settings. Then, we provide a brief overview of the concept of total institution and the mortification process. Finally, we expand on the relationship between mandatory HIV testing and much larger institutional objectives of total control, total structuring, total isolation, and separation of inmates from society (as summarized by Farrington, 1992). And lastly, we provide a brief discussion on the implications of mandatory HIV testing (as a method of HIV testing) from a nursing perspective.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it