Caregivers’ views on stigmatization and discrimination of people affected by leprosy in Ghana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Leprosy is a condition that has long been associated with stigma and discrimination, even when infected persons have been cured. This paper describes stigma and discrimination as viewed by caregivers who are associated with people affected by leprosy in Ghana. METHODS: A qualitative interview with semi-structured interviews were conducted for twenty caregivers. RESULTS: Findings indicated that caregivers were of the view that people affected by leprosy in Ghana are stigmatized and discriminated against by the larger society thus making their movements and interactions restricted to the Leprosarium. Besides, employments opportunities are unavailable to them thus making them exposed to financial challenges. The livelihood Empowerment Against poverty (LEAP) money given them is not sufficient for their daily upkeep. CONCLUSION: People affected by leprosy in Ghana are stigmatized and therefore find it difficult to interact freely with the public. The associated physical deformities with the disease also tend to impede their ability to relate to the general public. The LEAP cash given to people affected by leprosy is helpful however, it could be enhanced to keep pace with prevailing economic conditions in the country.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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".