Women’s expectations of treatment and care after an antenatal HIV diagnosis in Lilongwe, Malawi
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
Women in sub-Saharan Africa are increasingly learning their HIV status in prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV (PMTCT) programmes in the context of antenatal care. This paper examines women's decisions about HIV testing and their experience of PMTCT and HIV-related care in one clinic in Lilongwe, Malawi. It is based on qualitative, ethnographic research conducted in 2004 and 2005, including interviews and focus group discussions with 55 HIV-positive women participating in a PMTCT programme, and 21 interviews with key informants from the programme and the health system. Women's expectations from testing were consistent with the benefits for their own health and their infants' health, as communicated by nurses. However, the PMTCT programme only poorly met their expectations. Reasons for this disjuncture included the construction of women as still healthy even when they needed treatment, a focus only on infant health, health system weaknesses, lack of integrated care and timely referral, and defining HIV exclusively as a medical issue, while ignoring the social determinants of health. Women's own health was particularly marginalised within the PMTCT programme, yet good models exist for comprehensive care for women, infants and their families that should be implemented as testing is scaled up.
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