Impact of Community-Based HIV/AIDS Treatment on Household Incomes in Uganda
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Though health benefits to households in developing countries from antiretroviral treatment (ART) programs are widely reported in the literature, specific estimates regarding impacts of treatments on household incomes are rare. This type of information is important to governments and donors, as it is an indication of returns to their ART investments, and to better understand the role of HIV/AIDS in development. The objective of this study is to estimate the impact of a community-based ART program on household incomes in a previously underserved rural region of Uganda. A community-based ART program, based largely on labor contributions from community volunteers, was implemented and evaluated. All households with HIV/AIDS patients enrolled in the treatment programme (n = 134 households) were surveyed five times; once at the beginning of the treatment and every three months thereafter for a period of one year. Data were collected on household income from cash earnings and value of own production. The analysis, using ordinary least squares and quantile regressions, identifies the impact of the ART program on household incomes over the first year of the treatment, while controlling for heterogeneity in household characteristics and temporal changes. As a result of the treatment, health conditions of virtually all patients improved, and household incomes increased by approximately 30% to 40%, regardless of household income quantile. These increases in income, however, varied significantly depending on socio-demographic and socio-economic control variables. Overall, results show large and significant impacts of the ART program on household incomes, suggesting large returns to public investments in ART, and that treating HIV/AIDS is an important precondition for development. Moreover, development programs that invest in human capital and build wealth are important complements that can increase the returns to ART programs.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".