XVII International AIDS Conference: From Evidence to Action ‐ Social, behavioural and economic science and policy and political science
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIDS 2008 firmly established stigma and discrimination as fundamental priorities in the push for universal access to HIV prevention, treatment, care and support. Conference sessions and discussions reinforced the tangible negative effects of stigma on national legislation and policies. A strong theme throughout the conference was the need to replace prevention interventions that focus exclusively on individual behaviour change or biomedical prevention interventions with "combination prevention" approaches that address both individual and structural factors that increase vulnerability to HIV infection.Several high-level sessions addressed various aspects of the debate over "vertical" (disease-specific) versus "horizontal" (health systems) funding. The majority of evidence presented at the conference suggests that HIV investments strengthen health systems through the establishment of clinical and laboratory infrastructure, strengthened supply and procurement systems, improvements in health care worker training, and increased community engagement.Human rights were a focal point at the conference; several presentations emphasized the importance of securing human rights to achieve universal access goals, including workplace discrimination, travel restrictions, gender inequality, and the criminalization of homosexuality, drug use, sex work, and HIV transmission and/or exposure.
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 | 0.038 | 0.050 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.003 |
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".