MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2529288788 · doi:10.33915/etd.188

HIV/AIDS Intervention in Ghana: A Constructivist Approach to Understanding AIDS Policy

2012· dissertation· en· W2529288788 on OpenAlexaff
Nat Papa Kobina Markin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Development and Aid
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersUniversity of GhanaWorld Bank GroupGlobal Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and MalariaUnited States Agency for International Development
KeywordsHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Context (archaeology)Intervention (counseling)Political sciencePublic policyEconomic growthWork (physics)Policy analysisHealth policyPublic healthPolicy developmentPublic administrationMedicineGeographyEconomicsHealth careNursingEngineeringFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study is about how donor policy, NGO policy and public policy work together in Ghana's national strategic response to HIV and AIDS. The dissertation touches on two areas of public policy - development policy and health policy specifically relating to HIV/AIDS to determine congruity of the policy approaches of the three groups. Based on a survey done in Accra, Ghana in summer 2010 and on documentary sources of data collection, the study captures areas of agreement and disagreement of the three groups and discusses their effects on policy implementation. In broader terms, it analyzes assistance for HIV/AIDS in the context of international development aid and how current economic realities make such assistance unsustainable in the long term. It concludes by developing a prescriptive model of HIV policy intervention in Ghana with proposed revisions to the current policy model.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.022
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInternational Development and AidFrench-language works237,207