MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2218652736 · doi:10.1016/j.rhm.2015.11.020

Stigma, sexual health, and human rights among women who have sex with women in Lesotho

2015· article· en· W2218652736 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueReproductive Health Matters · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesUnited Nations Development Programme
KeywordsReproductive healthHuman rightsFocus groupStigma (botany)Psychological interventionMen who have sex with menPopulationGender studiesPsychologyMedicineHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Environmental healthPolitical scienceFamily medicineSociologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, gender and sexual minorities have become increasingly visible across sub-Saharan Africa, marking both the progression and violation of their human rights. Using data from a study with sexual minorities in Lesotho, this analysis leveraged the social ecological model to examine relationships between stigma, human rights, and sexual health among women who have sex with women in Lesotho. A community-based participatory approach was used for the mixed-method, cross-sectional study. A total of 250 women who have sex with women completed a structured questionnaire, of which 21 participated in a total of three focus group discussions. Stigma was common within and outside the health sector. Stigma and human rights abuses were associated with increased risk for HIV and STIs. Interventions to address stigma at the structural, community, and interpersonal levels are essential to ensuring sexual health and rights for women who have sex with women in Lesotho.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.288
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.320 · 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