A study of HIV positive undocumented African migrants’ access to health services in the UK
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Newly immigrated persons, whatever their origin, tend to fall in the lower socioeconomic levels. In fact, failure of an asylum application renders one destitute in a large proportion of cases, often resulting in a profound lack of access to basic necessities. With over a third of HIV positive failed asylum seekers reporting no income, and the remainder reporting highly limited resources, poverty is a reality for the vast majority. The purpose of the study was to determine the basic social processes that guide HIV positive undocumented migrant’s efforts to gain health services in the UK. The study used the Grounded Theory Approach. Theoretical saturation occurred after 16 participants were included in the study. The data included reflections of the prominent factors related to the establishment of a safe and productive life and the ability of individuals to remain within the UK. The data reflected heavily upon the ability of migrants to enter the medical care system during their asylum period, and on an emerging pattern of service denial after loss on immigration appeal, which often resulted in a discontinuation of medical therapies. This inevitably was associated with a pattern of decline and inability to fundamental needs. The findings of this study are notable in that they have demonstrated sequence of events along a timeline related to the interaction between the asylum process and access to health related services. The results reflect that African migrants maintain a degree of formal access to health services during the period that they possess legal access to services and informal access after the failure of their asylum claim.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".