Sexual practices, identities and health among women who have sex with women in Lesotho – a mixed-methods study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the high prevalence of HIV and STIs among women in Africa and the growing literature on HIV and STIs among women who have sex with women, research on the sexual health of women who have sex with women in Africa is scant. This study used mixed methods to describe sexual identity, practices and health among women who have sex with women in Lesotho. Most respondents (48%) described themselves as lesbian, 29% as bisexual and 23% as heterosexual. Almost half (45%) had disclosed their same-sex attraction to family, but only 25% had done so with healthcare workers. A total of 8% reported having HIV. Self-reported HIV was associated with having three or more male partners, having male and female partners at the same time and having a history of STIs. Gender norms, the criminalisation of homosexuality, varied knowledge of, and access to, safer-sex strategies, and mixed experiences of HIV/STI testing and sexual healthcare provided social and structural contexts for HIV- and STI-related vulnerability.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".