MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2172076337 · doi:10.6000/1927-5129.2014.10.40

Factors Determining Voluntary Counseling and Testing (VCT) for the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) among Low Income Women: Focus Group Findings from Rural, Urban, and Peri-Urban Women Groups in Lilongwe District-Malawi

2014· article· en· W2172076337 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marisen Mwale

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Basic & Applied Sciences · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFocus groupCondomVoluntary counseling and testingQualitative propertyPsychologyIncentiveMedicineSocial psychologyEnvironmental healthFamily medicineHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)PopulationSociologyHealth facility

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most high prevalence sub-Saharan African countries tend to over-emphasize fidelity and condom use as major preventative measures relative to HIV and AIDS prevention. Studies of behavior change that focus exclusively on these strategies of most interest to the prevention community bias examinations of behaviour change downward by ignoring other potentially effective ways of limiting the epidemic. Regardless of the dearth in efficacy, as well as tolerance bottlenecks; the prevailing debate over provider initiated testing in Malawi may depict a shift towards HIV Testing and Counseling (HTC) in Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (AIDS) prevention. The current study examines factors that determine VCT uptake among low income women in the Lilongwe district. A qualitative paradigm- the Focus Group Discussion (FGD) was utilized to inform the study. Convenient sampling was used to isolate three women groups namely; St John Nsamba, Women of Action, and National Association of People Having AIDS in Malawi (NAPHAM) support group as participants. The first two groups were sampled as primary groups, the former representing the urban domain with the later representing the rural domain respectively. Between 10 – 15 participants from each group, approximately within the age category 20-49 were involved. Findings suggest socio-cultural gender stereotypes inhibiting negotiating testing with partners as well as the social comparison or optimistic bias motivating ordinary women to underestimate their risk of contracting HIV relative to significant others as major barriers. Recurrent illnesses was considered the major motivator, downplaying the empirical impression about access to treatment as major incentive. The methodical conclusion drawn from the study is that VCT has the potential to mitigate the spread of HIV but for the preventative measure to be successful there is need to surmount various ethnographic and socio-cultural constraints currently impeding the intervention.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.279 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Basic & Applied SciencesSame topicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive HealthFrench-language works237,207