Behaviour Modification for Stigma Reduction and Psychological Functioning Among People Living With HIV/AIDS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
HIV/AIDS stigma is still pervasive and continues to negatively impact the psychological functioning of PLWHA in South African communities. The aim of this study was to design, implement, and to empirically evaluate the efficacy of an HIV/AIDS stigma reduction intervention. Adopting a two-phase study approach, the study was anchored on a cross-sectional design for phase I, and a pre-test post-test control group design for phase II. Phase I study was a baseline assessment of HIV and AIDS stigma experiences as well as psychological functioning among PLWHA, while phase II focused on empirically tailoring an HIV/AIDS stigma reduction intervention - the Stigma Coping Skills Intervention (SCSI). The HIV/AIDS stigma scale was used to determine HIV/AIDS stigma, while the GHQ-28 was used to determine psychological functioning. The sample comprised of 300 PLWHA. Purposive sampling method was employed for phase I study. Phase II study comprised a total of 24 participants equally assigned to experimental and control groups. Simple random sampling method was used for the phase II study. Findings indicated that the intervention was significant on stigma, and was also significant on psychological functioning. The SCSI demonstrated efficacy in HIV and AIDS stigma reduction, as well as improving psychological functioning.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".