AIDS‐NGOs and political participation: Brazilian and Canadian experiences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Non‐governmental organizations (AIDS‐NGO) are an instrument of political pressure and assistance, often serving as a life reconstruction aid for people living with HIV/AIDS. In this case study, we analyze data from historical documents, in‐depth interviews, and questionnaires obtained from participants and community agents in two AIDS‐NGOs: one in Canada (NGO‐Ca), and another in Brazil (NGO‐Br). Despite contextual differences, both NGOs are involved in a fight against stigma and discrimination that may aggravate existing social exclusion. Variances in political participation are nevertheless evident. In NGO‐Ca, efforts are directed towards maintaining and consolidating human and social rights. In NGO‐Br, the primary goal is building these. In NGO‐Ca, the participant is part of a structured organization where he or she receives the required supports; the NGO is thus a service provider. Conversely, in NGO‐Br, the participant is both the actor and author of collectively constructed supportive actions. It is hoped that the lessons learned from this limited case study will assist in the strengthening of AIDS‐NGO organization and activity, particularly in the developing world context. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".