MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Role of Fiscal Policy in Tackling the HIV/AIDS Epidemic in Southern Africa

2013· article· en· W2111993228 on OpenAlexaff
John C. Anyanwu, Yaovi Gassesse Siliadin, Ejikeme Okonkwo

Bibliographic record

VenueAfrican Development Review · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHIV/AIDS Impact and Responses
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWelfareDebtFiscal policyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)EconomicsDeveloping countryDevelopment economicsFiscal sustainabilityEconomic growthMedicineMonetary economicsMacroeconomicsVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Three countries in southern Africa have the highest adult HIV prevalence in the world: Swaziland (25.9 per cent), Botswana (24.8 per cent), and Lesotho (23.6 per cent). Fiscal policy is crucial for addressing this HIV/AIDS crisis. Utilizing a calibrated model, this paper investigates the impact of fiscal policy on reducing the HIV/AIDS incidence rates in these countries. In particular, we studied the welfare impact of different taxation and debt paths in these countries in reducing the HIV/AIDS prevalence rates. This is particularly important given the current concerns about dwindling foreign aid (especially the global AIDS fund), and the fiscal deterioration and sustainability in these countries. Our results show that, acting optimally has not only a positive societal welfare effect but also positive fiscal effects. For example, it will alleviate the debt burden by 5 per cent, 1 per cent and 13 per cent of the GDP, respectively for Botswana, Lesotho and Swaziland by the year 2020. Thus, at a time of fiscal crisis in developed countries and dwindling international HIV/AIDS resources, the future of effective and efficient HIV/AIDS intervention in Africa is clearly domestic.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAfrican Development ReviewSame topicHIV/AIDS Impact and ResponsesFrench-language works237,207