Measuring Stigma related to People with Albinism in Tanzania: A Cultural Validation Study of the EMIC-CSS and SDS among Adults
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: People with albinism in Tanzania are severely stigmatised. A measurement tool to assess this stigmatisation among adults is lacking. This research aimed at the cultural validation of two Scales to measure stigma related to albinism: The Albinism Social Distance Scale (A-SDS) and the Albinism Explanatory Model Interview Catalogue Community Stigma Scale (A-EMIC-CSS).Method: Conceptual, item, semantic and operational equivalences were evaluated through focus groups and interviews. A pilot study among adults attending religious institutes, as a representation of Tanzanian society, was conducted to assess the measurement equivalence. There were 101 respondents for the test and 79 respondents for the re-test.Results: Conceptual, item, semantic and operational equivalences of the Scales are sufficient. In terms of measurement equivalence, the internal consistency of the A-SDS and A-EMIC-CSS are adequate. However, social desirability should be taken into account when interpreting the findings.Conclusion and Implications: The insights provided by this article can aid in the development of tools to measure stigma cross-culturally and across stigmatising conditions. The combination of the two Scales for short and long-term effect measurement is recommended.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it