Bleeding Bodies, Untrustworthy Bodies: A Social Constructionist Approach to Health and Wellbeing of Young People in Kenya
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Sustainable Development Goals provide a global development agenda that is meant to be inclusive of all people. However, the development needs for vulnerable populations such as youth are not reflected within the policy agenda of some developing countries. One of the reasons for this is that research that explores health and wellbeing concerns for young people are sparse in the region and where they exist, the focus has been on marginalized subgroups. To address this gap, this cross-sectional study explored the health and wellbeing of youth in Kenya. We conducted 10 focus group discussions and 14 in-depth interviews with youth ages 15 to 24 years. A thematic analysis of the data revealed that structural factors are important influencers of youth perceptions and their social constructions of health and wellbeing. Kenyan youth are concerned about the health status and healthcare services in their communities, as well as issues of community trust of youths and perceived risks of political misuse and emotional suffering. Our findings suggest that youth transitioning into adulthood in resource-constrained areas experience feelings of powerlessness and inability to take charge over their own life. This impacts how they perceive and socially construct health and wellbeing.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".