Assessing the Relationship between Caregivers Burden and Availability of Support for Family Caregivers’ of HIV/AIDS Patients in Calabar, South East Nigeria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: This study examined the level of burden and the extent of support on family caregivers of people living with AIDS (PLWHA) in Calabar, South East Nigeria. Methods: A mixed method with cross sectional approach was used. Purposive sampling technique guided the recruitment process and data collection methods included, semi-structured questionnaires and focusing group discussion. 260 respondents participated in the study. The quantitative data were mined with the aid of SPSS and the qualitative data were analysed with the aid of NVivo8 using thematic analysis. Results: Results indicated high level of burden with limited support to caregivers. A Chi-square value of 25.1 was obtained at P and financial burden for the caregivers. Similarly, information on coping skills, emotional support, financial assistance and help with caregiving themes emerged for social support. Conclusion: In Nigeria, the burden of caring for HIV/AIDS patients has a remarkable impact on family caregivers. This calls for the development of policies that can systematically address the needs of family caregivers in order to ameliorate the negative consequences of caregiving for PLWHA.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".