Exploring disability from the perspective of adults living with HIV/AIDS: Development of a conceptual framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Since the advent of combination antiretroviral therapy, in developed countries HIV increasingly is perceived as a long-term illness. Individuals may experience health-related consequences of HIV and its associated treatments, a concept that may be termed disability. To date, a comprehensive framework for understanding the health-related consequences experienced by people living with HIV has not been developed. The purpose of this research was to develop a conceptual framework of disability from the perspective of adults living with HIV. METHODS: We conducted four focus groups and 15 face-to-face interviews with 38 adults living with HIV. We asked participants to describe their health-related challenges, their physical, social and psychological areas of life affected, and impact on their overall health. We analyzed data using grounded theory techniques. We also conducted two validity check focus groups with seven returning participants. RESULTS: Disability was conceptualized by participants as multi-dimensional and episodic characterized by unpredictable periods of wellness and illness. The Episodic Disability Framework consisted of three main components: a) dimensions of disability that included symptoms and impairments, difficulties carrying out day-to-day activities, challenges to social inclusion, and uncertainty that may fluctuate on a daily basis and over the course of living with HIV, b) contextual factors that included extrinsic factors (social support and stigma) and intrinsic factors (living strategies and personal attributes) that may exacerbate or alleviate disability, and c) triggers that initiate momentous or major episodes of disability such as receiving an HIV diagnosis, starting or changing medications, experiencing a serious illness, and suffering a loss of others. CONCLUSION: The Episodic Disability Framework considers the variable nature of disability, acknowledges uncertainty as a key component, describes contextual factors that influence experiences of disability, and considers life events that may initiate a major or momentous episode. This framework presents a new way to conceptualize disability based on the experience of living with HIV.
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 | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".