Giving Back Is Receiving: The Role of Generativity in Successful Aging Among HIV-Positive Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Successful aging has been identified as an important emphasis for people living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Little is known about how this population conceptualizes aging successfully and how this relates to generativity. This qualitative study examined the importance of generativity among 30 HIV-positive older adults to determine the role of generativity in successful aging. Method: Participants aged 50+ years were recruited in Ontario, Canada, through acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) service organizations, clinics, and community agencies. Qualitative interviews were analyzed to explore strategies participants employed to engage in successful aging within their own personal context. Results: Participants saw themselves as pioneers and mentors, helping others to navigate the landscape of aging with HIV. Four themes were identified through consensus including (a) reciprocity, (b) mentoring, (c) pioneerism, and (d) connecting through volunteerism. Discussion: Interventions that promote intergenerational connections, community involvement, and generative acts within the HIV community can facilitate successful aging among older adults living with HIV/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 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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".