Women living with HIV/AIDS and the bodily transformation process known as the lipodystrophy syndrome: a grounded theory study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the past decade, the lipodystrophy syndrome has become one of the biggest challenges in the field of HIV/AIDS. Yet, few qualitative studies have examined how lipodystrophy affects the lives of people living with HIV/AIDS by reconfiguring their bodies in unexpected ways. The main objective of this qualitative study was to explore and describe the transformation process that women experience following the onset of lipodystrophy. The data were collected using semi-structured interviews and were then analysed following the principles of grounded theory. Overall, the research participants explained how lipodystrophy had transformed their bodies, disrupted their identities and confined them to a fragile social trajectory. In this sense, the experience of lipodystrophy was described as a profoundly disruptive transformation that includes three distinct stages: normalisation, problematisation and pathologisation. This process was characterised by the progression of lipodystrophy, as well as an intensification of the efforts to regain control over the body. At last, this study provides health care providers with a better understanding of the psychosocial impact of lipodystrophy and the needs of women who suffer from this condition.
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 | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".