MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2601451943

Landmark Articles From Volumes 31-40 / Des articles-jalons tirés des volumes 31 à 40 - Evaluation of the AIDS Prevention Street Nurse Program: One Step at a Time

2009· article· en· W2601451943 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
B. Ann Hilton, Ray Thompson, Laura Moore‐Dempsey

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Nursing Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarm reductionFeelingContext (archaeology)NursingHarmMedicineHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Psychological interventionHealth promotionPsychologyFamily medicinePublic healthSocial psychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The AIDS Prevention Street Nurse Program uses specially prepared community health nurses to focus on HIV and STD prevention with marginalized, hard-to-reach and high-risk clients within a broader context of harm reduction and health promotion. Street nurses (n = 17), service providers (n = 30), representatives of other HIV/STD programs in the province of British Columbia, Canada (n = 5), and clients (n = 32) were interviewed during an evaluation for the purpose of describing the nurses' work, the challenges the nurses' face, the fit of the program with other services, and the impact of the nurses' work. This article describes the impact of the nurses' work on clients. Impact/outcome changes reflected a progression from knowledge to behavioural levels and to major indicators of health/illness. Impact on clients included: knowing more about HIV/AIDS, their own situation, and options; receiving essential supplies to reduce harm and promote health; changing behaviour to reduce disease transmission, improve resistance, and promote health; connecting with help; feeling better about themselves and others; feeling supported; influencing others; receiving earlier attention for problems; being healthier with or without HIV; making major changes in drug use; and likely decreasing morbidity and mortality. The program was found to be clearly effective in making a positive impact on clients.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.174
Threshold uncertainty score0.582

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1740.043

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 head0.393
GPT teacher head0.529
Teacher spread0.136 · 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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Nursing ResearchSame topicFood Security and Health in Diverse PopulationsFrench-language works237,207