Project ACCLAIM: Intervention Effect on Community Knowledge, Attitudes and Beliefs of Maternal and Child Health and HIV/AIDS in Eswatini, Uganda and Zimbabwe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ACCLAIM Study aimed to assess the effect of a package of community interventions on the demand for, uptake of, and retention of HIV-positive pregnant/postpartum women in maternal and child health (MCH) and prevention of mother-to-child HIV transmission (PMTCT) services. The study occurred from 2013 to 2015 in Eswatini, Uganda, and Zimbabwe. The three interventions were: (1) a social learning and action component for community leaders, (2) community days, and (3) peer discussion groups. Household cross-sectional surveys on community members' MCH and PMTCT knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs were analyzed pre- and post-intervention, using MCH, HIV stigma, and gender-equitable men (GEM) indicators. We used t-tests to measure the significance of mean pre- vs. post-intervention score changes stratified by gender within each intervention arm and generalized linear models to compare mean score changes of the cumulative intervention arms with the community leaders-only intervention. Response rates were over 85% for both surveys for men and women, with a total of 3337 pre-intervention and 3162 post-intervention responses. The combined package of three interventions demonstrated a significantly greater increase in MCH scores for both women (diff = 1.34, p ≤ 0.001) and men (diff = 2.03, p < 0.001). The arms that included interventions for both community leader engagement and community days (arms 2 and 3)led to a greater increase in mean GEM scores compared to the community leader engagement intervention alone (arm 1), for both women (diff = 1.32, p = 0.002) and men (diff = 1.37, p = 0.004). Our findings suggest that a package of community interventions may be most effective in increasing community MCH/HIV knowledge and improving gender-equitable norms.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".