The Global Commission on HIV and the Law: recommendations for legal reform to promote sexual and reproductive health and rights
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Global Commission on HIV and the Law was established in 2010 to identify and analyse the complex framework of international, national, religious and customary law shaping national responses to HIV and the well-being of people living with HIV and key populations. Two years of deliberation, based on an exhaustive review of international public health and human rights scholarship, as well as almost 700 testimonials from individuals and organizations in more than 130 countries, informed the Commission's recommendations on reform to laws and practices that criminalize those living with and vulnerable to HIV, sustain or mitigate violence and discrimination lived by women, facilitate or impede access to HIV-related treatment, and/or pertain to children and young people in the context of HIV. This paper presents the Commission's findings and recommendations as they relate to sexual and reproductive health and rights, and examines how the Commission's work intersects with strategic litigation on forced sterilization of women living with HIV, legal reform on the status of transgender individuals, initiatives to improve police treatment of female sex workers, and equal property rights for women living with HIV in sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America.
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 | 0.116 | 0.166 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.044 | 0.033 |
| Open science | 0.009 | 0.017 |
| Research integrity | 0.079 | 0.040 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.004 |
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".