Sexual behaviors among women living with HIV in Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the sexual activities and partnerships of women living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) remains important to promote healthy sexuality and to reduce the transmission of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections. We described sexual behaviors of women living with HIV enrolled in an ongoing study in Ontario, Canada. Data were available from 582 women who self-completed a sexual behavior questionnaire between 2010 and 2012. Nearly half (46.1%) of women reported a sexual partner in the preceding three months; women less likely to be sexually active were older, Black/African, separated, divorced, widowed, single, and unemployed. Most sexually active women had one partner (76.4%), a regular partner (75.9%), male (96.2%) partner(s), and partners who were HIV-negative or unknown HIV status (75.2%). Women were more likely to use a condom with HIV-negative/status unknown partners (81.3%) than with HIV-positive partners (58.6%; p = .008). Only 8.0% of sexually active women reported condomless sex with a discordant HIV-negative/status unknown partner when their viral load was detectable. Overall, most women living with HIV were sexually inactive or engaged in sexual activities that were low risk for HIV transmission.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".