MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2780221334 · doi:10.1080/17525098.2017.1413515

Impacts of HIV/AIDS on poor and socially marginalised former commercial plasma donors in rural central China: social work implications

2017· article· en· W2780221334 on OpenAlexaff
Yurong Zhang, Rusty Souleymanov

Bibliographic record

VenueChina Journal of Social Work · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities
KeywordsSocial exclusionStigma (botany)ChinaEconomic growthSocioeconomic statusSocioeconomicsRural areaPopulationPovertySocial stigmaSociologyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Political scienceEnvironmental healthMedicineEconomicsImmunologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Little is known about the impact of HIV/AIDS on people who acquired the virus through former commercial plasma donations in the mid-1990s in rural Central China. The objective of this study was to examine socioeconomic impacts associated with HIV/AIDS on poor farm workers and their families, with a particular focus on economic hardships and social exclusion. The findings from 30 interviews reveal the profound effects of deteriorating health on labour power loss. The well-being of people living with HIV/AIDS was immensely affected by the loss of income, debts due to health-related expenses and a lack of alternate sources of income. Social exclusion and HIV/AIDS-related stigma remain significant issues in a workplace, funerals, and weddings. This article highlights the economic impacts of HIV/AIDS on China’s rural population and provides recommendations for social workers to mitigate the impacts of social exclusion on vulnerable rural households in China.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChina Journal of Social WorkSame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207