Mandatory HIV screening, migration and HIV stigma in Canada: exploring the experiences of sub-Saharan African immigrants living with HIV in western Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In this mixed-methods pilot study, we examined the intersections of the current Canadian immigration policy, mandatory HIV screening during the Immigration Medical Exam (IME) and enacted and internalized stigma for HIV-positive immigrants from sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) in a western Canadian province. We focus on qualitative findings from this study. METHODS: Using the Internalized HIV Stigma Scale (IHSS), we collected data from eight immigrants from SSA living with HIV in a western Canadian province. We then conducted semistructured interviews with seven of the eight participants. Due to the small sample size, survey data were summarized using descriptive analysis. Qualitative data were analyzed through constant comparative analysis. RESULTS: The following key themes emerged from analysis of qualitative data: experiences of HIV-related emotional distress during the IME; varied experiences of HIV testing during the IME; and inconsistent patterns of linkage to medical care, psychosocial supports and engagement in the HIV care cascade. CONCLUSION: Findings from this pilot study cannot be generalized to the broader population of immigrants living with HIV in Canada. However, we found that the experiences of internalized HIV stigma and enacted stigma during the IME potentially influence the long-term engagement in the HIV care cascade during the process of migration and settlement in Canada. Further study in this population is recommended to examine the intersections of current mandatory HIV screening process during the Canadian immigration process, migration, settlement, culture, stigma and engagement in the HIV care cascade.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.029 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| 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".