Superstition, witchcraft and HIV prevention in sub-Saharan Africa: the case of Ghana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Belief in superstition and witchcraft is central to many African conceptions of illness, disease causation and etiology. While a number of anthropological studies have alluded to a theoretical link between such beliefs and HIV prevention in particular, there is limited empirical assessment of the association. Using data from the 2008 Ghana Demographic and Health Survey and applying random-effects logit models, we investigate whether the belief that AIDS can spread through witchcraft associates with the sexual decision making of never-married men and women. The results show that men who believed AIDS can spread through witchcraft and other supernatural means were less likely to have used condoms at last sexual intercourse, controlling for other socioeconomic and cultural variables. Women with similar beliefs were more likely to have experienced sexual intercourse but less likely to have used condoms at last sex. For women, however, the relationship between such superstitious beliefs and condom use was somewhat attenuated after controlling for ethnicity and region of residence. From a policy perspective, the findings suggest that local beliefs regarding AIDS causation must be considered in designing HIV/AIDS programmes and interventions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".