Working HIV care-givers in Botswana: Spill-over effects on work and family well-being
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
Families provide most of the care to the tens of millions of HIV-infected and -affected in Africa. Little research exists on how care-givers balance the demands of holding a job with providing care for those who have become ill or orphaned by HIV/AIDS. Using data from a large survey administered to 1,077 working care-givers in Botswana, we compared the experience of HIV care-givers with non-HIV care-givers. Compared to non-HIV care-givers, HIV care-givers were more likely to worry about routine childcare (44% vs. 31%) and sick childcare (64% vs. 49%). Amongst those working far from home, more HIV care-givers were concerned that their children were not receiving adequate academic support (39% vs. 20%) and emotional support (57% vs. 33%). Parents who were HIV care-givers were less able to spend time with their own children. Children of HIV care-givers were more likely to have physical, mental and academic problems. While HIV care-givers were more likely to take leave from work for care-giving (53% vs. 39%), and for longer periods of time (13 vs. 7.6 days), this leave is more likely to be unpaid. Strategies to support those directly and indirectly affected by HIV and to avoid economic responsibility are discussed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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