Vulnerable Youth as Prosumers in HIV Prevention: Studies Using Participatory Action Research
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Stigma, voicelessness, and legislative and rights barriers, coupled with top-down decision making, are the common experiences of vulnerable youth populations that limit their opportunities to participate in vital health promotion efforts such as HIV prevention. OBJECTIVE: To consider new opportunities arising from a digital society for youth to creatively shape HIV prevention. METHODS: Drawing on research with vulnerable youth in Busoga, Uganda; Bulawayo, Zimbabwe; Bangkok, Thailand; and Bali, Indonesia, we explore current youth participation, in theory and practice, while considering new opportunities arising from a digital society for youth to creatively shape HIV prevention. RESULTS: Collaborative commons and prosumer models are defined as people employing new technology to codesign toward a common goal. Within the context of a diminishing role of the traditional institution and the rise of digitized networks, such models offer exciting new directions for youth as electronic health promotion prosumers to participate in difficult challenges such as HIV prevention in the 21st century. CONCLUSIONS: It is time for institutions to embrace such opportunities, especially in areas where access to technology is widening, while continuing to champion youth and advocate for supportive social environments.
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.
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 | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it