HIV-related syndemic pathways and risk subjectivities among gay and bisexual men: a qualitative investigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Life history interviews were conducted with 40 gay and bisexual men to identify modes of syndemic experience and risk practice. Out of the interview narratives emerged one major and two minor modes of developmental pathway whereby syndemic conditions are navigated and expressed: (1) a combination of adverse childhood events with later episodes of depression and/or substantial substance use; (2) personal disruption that led to periods of depression and anxiety associated with the stresses of migration; and (3) a disorientation and an unravelling of life trajectory in the transition from family of origin to college or work. Risk practices fell into three high-risk modes: active and frequent engagement in condomless sex; unassertive deferment to a partner's initiation of condomless sex; and episodic risk combined with a risk reduction strategy. Three low risk modes were also identified: no recent condomlessness but multiple risk history in interview; a trajectory over time from high to low risk; and consistent low risk practice. These different modes of syndemic experience and risk management may have implications for identification of the effective HIV prevention tools that work best for different sets of men.
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 | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".