MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148290636 · doi:10.1177/2325957414547431

Aging with HIV

2014· article· en· W2148290636 on OpenAlexafffund
Patricia Solomon, Kelly K. O’Brien, Seanne Wilkins, Nicole Gervais

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the International Association of Providers of AIDS Care (JIAPAC) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV-related health complications and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsGrounded theoryStigma (botany)Qualitative researchHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Psychological interventionGerontologyPsychologyQuality of life (healthcare)Context (archaeology)MedicineDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyPsychiatryFamily medicineSociologyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this qualitative study was to develop a theoretical model describing the disability experienced by older adults living with HIV. Forty nine HIV positive men and women over the age of 50 years participated in in-depth qualitative interviews. Transcribed interviews were analyzed using grounded theory techniques. Uncertainty or worrying about the future was at the core of the model. Components of disability including symptoms and impairments, difficulties with day to day activities and challenges to social participation were experienced in the context of extrinsic or environmental factors (social support, stigma) and intrinsic contextual factors (positive living strategies, age). Time was an overarching component of the model. The model suggests areas for interventions to prevent or reduce disability related to the consequences of aging with HIV and improve overall quality of life.

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)0.005
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations35
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the International Association of Providers of AIDS Care (JIAPAC)Same topicHIV-related health complications and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207