MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2254958972

The smokescreen of culture: AIDS and the indigenous in Papua, Indonesia.

2002· article· en· W2254958972 on OpenAlexaff
Leslie Butt, Gerdha Numbery, Jake Morin

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousCondomColonialismContext (archaeology)Government (linguistics)Economic growthSociologyPolitical scienceSocioeconomicsHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Gender studiesGeographyMedicineEconomicsVirology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In health transition studies on AIDS, government activities typically have been accorded less importance than local cultural practices. Certain social and cultural values, theorists argue, prevent potentially at-risk individuals from taking effective precautions to prevent HIV infection during sexual intercourse. This paper shows how a focus on culture is inadequate to understanding the issue of risk when the AIDS epidemic occurs in a colonial context. A study conducted in 2001 in Papua (West Papua), eastern Indonesia, shows that ongoing colonial relationships between indigenous Papuans and in-migrant Indonesians create inequities in AIDS awareness. Rates of HIV infection in Papua are high, but indigenous Papuans have a low level of awareness. Drawing on a survey of condom use and the sex work industry, this paper shows that government values, and economic conditions, need to be scrutinized as closely as culture in order to provide effective AIDS prevention in Papua.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations33
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive HealthFrench-language works237,207