MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2318321715 · doi:10.1177/000841740907600405

Barriers and Facilitators to Participation in Work among Canadian Women Living with HIV/AIDS

2009· article· en· W2318321715 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
Valerie Barkey, Elisa Watanabe, Seanne Wilkins

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Occupational Therapy · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsContext (archaeology)NegotiationPhenomenonAgency (philosophy)Occupational therapyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)NormativeRehabilitationGender studiesMedicineSociologyPsychologyGerontologyPolitical scienceFamily medicinePhysical therapySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The impact of human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS) on the participation of women in paid/unpaid work is a little understood phenomenon. PURPOSE: A research study exploring the lived experiences of Canadian women's engagement in paid/unpaid work and the barriers and facilitators mediating this phenomenon. METHOD: Study design employed a phenomenological approach using data subanalysis of transcripts, double coded for agreement and to ensure saturation of themes. RESULTS: Analysis of the data revealed an overarching theme of engagement mediated by interacting forces with eight subthemes: active management, agency constrained by structure, the nature of supports, HIV/AIDS sequelae, work as a galvanizing force, the presence of children, the element of fear, and negotiation of self. IMPLICATIONS: Insights gained indicate a need for further education, resources, supports, and policy changes at the systems level. Occupational therapy is positioned to broaden the role of rehabilitation in the context of HIV/AIDS, episodic disability, and work participation.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.307
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.334 · 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

Citations18
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Occupational TherapySame topicOccupational Therapy Practice and ResearchFrench-language works237,207