Myths and misconceptions about HIV transmission in Ghana: what are the drivers?
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
Biomedical and social cognitive models driving HIV preventive activities in sub-Saharan Africa are mostly premised on factual and accurate knowledge of the disease. While knowledge about HIV exists in most parts of Africa, there is widespread belief in myths that often contradict and undermine preventive efforts. Using the 2008 Demographic and Health Survey and applying logit models, we examined what influences belief in myths and misconceptions surrounding HIV transmission among Ghanaian men and women. Results indicate that respondents with high knowledge of how HIV may be transmitted had lower odds of endorsing myths about the disease. Compared to the less educated and poorer Ghanaians, educated and wealthier Ghanaians were less likely to endorse myths about HIV. Also, compared to the Akan people, respondents identifying with other ethnic groups were significantly less likely to endorse myths. The findings suggest that policy makers provide accurate information about how the disease is spread to counter myths surrounding HIV transmission.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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