Disclosure experience in a convenience sample of quebec-born women living with HIV: a phenomenological study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In Canada, there has been a considerable increase in the number of women infected with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Within a stigmatized social context, disclosure of HIV positivity is still a prevailing concern among women. Little is known about the global understanding of how French-speaking, Quebec-born women living with HIV, live their serostatus disclosure experience. The aim of this qualitative study is to describe and understand the disclosure experience of these women. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with seven women. A convenience sample of French-speaking, Quebec-born women was chosen because they all responded to the criteria of wishing to share their disclosure experience. The mean age of the participants was 46 years old (SD±12). They lived with HIV for an average of 10 years; time since diagnosis varied from 8 months to 23 years. Two out of four mothers had given birth to HIV positive children. Data analysis proposed by van Manen was performed to discover the essential themes of the experience. RESULTS: Seven themes were identified to understand the experience of disclosure in women: 1) Respecting for self and confidants; 2) Feeling apprehension; 3) Exercising control to ensure protection; 4) Deliberately engaging in a process of disclosure/non-disclosure; 5) Exposing oneself to stigma and social exclusion; 6) Suffering internally; and 7) Benefitting from the positive effects of one's decision. For these women, disclosing their HIV status meant: Living the ambivalence of a paradoxical process of revealing/concealing, in a state of profound suffering, exacerbated by stigma, while also being enriched by the benefits attained. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the experience of disclosure in WLHIV is important to guide actions in the practice to support and accompany these women in their unique reality. Health professionals have to broaden their role and work on individual, interpersonal, inter-organizational and intersectoral levels. Mobilization of actors from different sectors would facilitate the implementation of pertinent and opportune interventions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".