Perceptions of Sexual Risk Compensation Following Posttrial HIV Vaccine Uptake Among Young South Africans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Concerns about the impact of risk compensation on advances in biomedical human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) prevention technologies have been documented. We conducted an exploratory qualitative study using focus group discussions with young South African men and women (aged 18 to 24 years) to explore perceptions of risk compensation with regard to a hypothetical posttrial HIV vaccine. During the discussions, participants expressed their disquiet about the potential for risk compensation and the manner in which this might manifest among young people. Discussions specifically focused on reductions in condom use, an increase in multiple partners, and increased frequency of sex. The discussions also revealed contradictory feelings about HIV vaccines: appreciation for their development tempered by concerns about loss of control and undermining morality. Women were particularly concerned with the possibility of increased partner concurrency and infidelity. We suggest that concerns in HIV vaccine target populations about the impact of possible risk compensation be incorporated into strategies for vaccine introduction once vaccines move from the hypothetical to reality.
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 | 0.046 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".