Living strategies for disability in men ageing with HIV in Ontario, Canada: a longitudinal qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To examine the living strategies used by older men living with HIV to deal with the episodic nature of disability and associated uncertainty, over time. DESIGN: Qualitative longitudinal study in which men living with HIV were interviewed on four occasions over 20 months. SETTING: Men were recruited from HIV community organisations in Canada. PARTICIPANTS: 14 men with a median age of 57.5 years and median time since diagnosis of 21.5 years. RESULTS: Five themes depict the living strategies used to deal with the episodic nature of disability and uncertainty over time. Actively engaging in problem-solving by prioritising and modifying activities and avoiding stress, advocating for support, being positive and future oriented, engaging in healthy pursuits and providing social support to others helped men to mitigate their disability. By following participants over time, we were able to gather insights into triggers of episodes of disability, and perceptions of the success of implementing their living strategies and avoiding uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS: Participants used living strategies to deal with uncertainty and mitigate episodes of disability over time. This study supports the importance of programmes that promote self-management for older men living with HIV through helping them identify triggers of disability, set realistic goals and problem-solve. These may help build self-efficacy, increase sense of control, and decrease feelings of uncertainty and episodes of disability.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".