MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167333329 · doi:10.2989/16085906.2015.1016987

HIV-related stigma: implications for symptoms of anxiety and depression among Malawian women

2015· article· en· W2167333329 on OpenAlexaff
Charles Kamen, Jill M. Arganbright, Eliza Kienitz, Melissa Weller, Anna Khaylis, Tammy Shenkman, Sarah Smith, Cheryl Koopman, Cheryl Gore–Felton

Bibliographic record

VenueAfrican Journal of AIDS Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsSpinal Cord Injury BC
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsAnxietyStigma (botany)MedicineWorryPsychological interventionPopulationPsychiatryDepression (economics)Social stigmaMental healthQuality of life (healthcare)Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Environmental healthImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An estimated 11% of the adult population in Malawi, Africa, is living with HIV/AIDS. The disease has taken a toll on communities, resulting in high morbidity and mortality. Malawian women carry the burden of being caretakers for individuals infected with HIV while also worrying about their own health. However, little is known about how HIV/ AIDS affects psychological functioning among Malawian women in areas hit hardest by the epidemic. To that end, this paper examined the influence of HIV-related stigma on symptoms of anxiety and depression among 59 women 17-46 years old who were recruited from the Namitete area of Malawi. Women who reported greater worry about being infected with HIV and greater HIV-related stigma were significantly more likely to report greater symptoms of anxiety and depression. These findings suggest that interventions that reduce HIV-related stigma are likely to enhance psychological functioning among Malawian women, which in turn will improve the women's quality of life and well-being.

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)0.004
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.143
Threshold uncertainty score0.346

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.336 · 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 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

Citations57
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAfrican Journal of AIDS ResearchSame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207