Mental health among adolescents living with HIV in Namibia: the role of poverty, orphanhood and social support
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mental health needs of children and adolescents living with HIV (ALHIV) in Namibia are poorly understood, despite the dramatic improvement in their survival. ALHIV in resource poor contexts face particular risk factors, such as poverty, orphanhood, and poor social support. This study examines the mental health of ALHIV in Namibia, and the factors that contribute to mental health problems. A case-control design assessed emotional and behavioural symptoms of distress, risk and protective factors among adolescents aged 12-18 years. Case participants were 99 HIV-positive adolescents. Case controls were 159 adolescents from the same community who were not known to be HIV seropositive at the time of the study. Control group participants were selected from schools using a stratified random sampling. A larger proportion of HIV-positive adolescents were orphaned (62.6% vs. 20.8%, p < .001); the groups showed no differences in poverty factors. HIV-positive adolescents scored lower than the control group on total perceived social support (p < .05) and caregiver support (p < .05), but no differences in perceived friend support and support from a self-selected person were present. HIV-positive adolescents reported significantly more total emotional and behavioural difficulties (p = .027) and conduct problems (p = .025), even after controlling for socio-demographic factors. However, after controlling for the effects of orphanhood, group differences in mental health outcomes were no longer significant. Furthermore, mediation analysis suggested that social support completely mediated the relationship between HIV status and mental health (standardised pathway coefficients = .05, p = .021). Policies and programmes that aim to strengthen social support and take orphanhood status into consideration may improve the mental health of adolescents living with HIV.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".