Intersectional Analysis at the Medico-Legal Borderland: HIV Testing Innovations and the Criminalization of HIV Non-Disclosure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
HIV testing technologies are evolving, and HIV-related criminal prosecutions are increasing. A new generation of HIV tests allows for much earlier detection of infection following the transmission event. HIV has an increased risk of transmission during the first eight weeks following infection due to greater infectivity in this very recent or acute phase (Brenner et al., 2007; Hayes and White, 2005; Hollingsworth, Anderson, and Fraser, 2008; Pao et al., 2005). As the Health Initiative for Men (HIM) puts it, HIV is "hottest at the start" (HIM, 2011). From a public health perspective, the importance of timely diagnosis during the acute phase is suggested from various data showing behavior change following an HIV-positive diagnosis (Marks et al., 2005). As such, the use of "early" HIV tests has important public health implications for the detection of HIV and the prevention of onward transmission. This has been the rationale for using these tests in pilot programs to help address the high rates of HIV among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM)2 in British Columbia (BC), Canada, as well as in other settings globally (Gilbert et al., 2011). What has not been thoroughly examined, however, is the possible relationship between these innovations in laboratory technologies and related HIV testing initiatives and the increasing use of the criminal law to prosecute alleged cases of HIV non-disclosure in Canada.KeywordsBritish ColumbiaStructural DriverUNAIDS Reference GroupIntersectional StigmaProsecutorial GuidelineThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".