Becoming “Undetectable”: Longitudinal Narratives of Gay Men's Sex Lives After a Recent HIV Diagnosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We explore gay men's sex life narratives following their diagnosis with an acute or recent HIV infection. All participants received an acute (n = 13) or recent (n = 12) HIV diagnosis and completed a series of self-administered questionnaires and in-depth qualitative interviews over a one-year period or longer. Over the course of four qualitative interviews, participants frequently spoke of the role of medications (e.g., decisions to start treatment) and changing viral loads (e.g., discourses of becoming "undetectable") in relation to their sex lives since being diagnosed with HIV. Many men talked about milestones relating to initiating medication and viral load as informing their shifting sexual behaviors and identities as HIV-positive--or "undetectable"--gay men. The narratives of our participants provide insight regarding complex negotiations and processes of decision-making over time related to sex, counseling needs, treatment initiation, viral load, and the significance of undetectability as an emergent identity.
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 | 0.009 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".