MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112049643 · doi:10.1177/1049732313494019

Stigma in AIDS Nursing Care in Sub-Saharan Africa and the Caribbean

2013· article· en· W2112049643 on OpenAlexafffund
Judy Mill, Jean Harrowing, Tania Rae, Solina Richter, Karin Minnie, Scovia Nalugo Mbalinda, Cerese Hepburn-Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueQualitative Health Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of LethbridgeUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHealth CanadaInstitut pour la Recherche en Santé PubliquePublic Health Agency of CanadaUnited States Agency for International Development
KeywordsStigma (botany)NursingMedicineSocial stigmaFocus groupNursing careContext (archaeology)Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Family medicinePsychiatrySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Some nurses who provide AIDS care, in addition to experiencing stigma themselves, also exhibit negative attitudes and perpetrate stigma and discrimination toward persons living with HIV (PLWHAs). We used a participatory research approach to explore the nature, context, and influence of stigma on the nursing care provided to PLWHAs in four low- and middle-income countries: Jamaica, Kenya, South Africa, and Uganda. Eighty-four registered nurses, enrolled nurses, and midwives participated in interviews and 79 participated in 11 focus groups. Nurses were very aware of the stigma and discrimination that AIDS evoked, and made adjustments to their care to decrease the manifestation of AIDS stigma. Despite the assurance that PLWHAs were treated equally, and that universal precautions were used consistently, we found that in reality, nurses sometimes made decisions about nursing care that were based on the appearance of the patient or knowledge of his or her status.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.317
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.244
GPT teacher head0.562
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations27
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQualitative Health ResearchSame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207