Strengths, Constraints and Gaps in HIV and AIDS Education Communication Process among NGOs in Kenya
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the enhancing and constraining factors in planning of communication process among HIV and AIDs NGOs in Kenya.The study aimed at assessing the NGOS conformity with acceptable communication principles; and to identify the strengths, gaps and constraints in the existing planning of the communication process of the said organisations.The study was carried out in Nairobi and Kisumu.The sample was derived from registered NGOS in Kenya offering HIV and AIDS education.Data was collected from both primary and secondary sources.Data from the semi-structured interviews were analysed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS), while data from the key informant interviews were analysed along thematic areas and used to support the information derived from the semi-structured interviews.The findings are presented using triangulation, as well as visual graphics, such as bar charts and pie charts.Data analysis was done using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) and themes respectively.Findings were presented using triangulation, graphics, such as bar charts and pie charts.The findings indicate that participation was well integrated in most of the organisations' interventions.The study concludes that one of the assumptions made in this study, participation was a key component for about three-quarters of the organisations.The researcher recommended for further research on audience studies on HIV and AIDS communication in Kenya; and the mass media and HIV and AIDS.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".