Development of the Canadian Women-Centred HIV Care Model Using the Knowledge-to-Action Framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Canada, women make up 25% of the prevalent HIV cases and represent an important population of those living with HIV, as a high proportion are racialized and systemically marginalized; furthermore, many have unmet healthcare needs. Using the knowledge-to-action framework as an implementation science methodology, we developed the "Women-Centred HIV Care" (WCHC) Model to address the needs of women living with HIV. The WCHC Model is depicted in the shape of a house with trauma- and violence-aware care as the "foundation". Person-centred care with attention with attention to social determinants of health and family make up the "first" floor. Women's health (including sexual and reproductive health and rights) and mental and addiction health care are integrated with HIV care, forming the "second" floor. Peer support, leadership, and capacity building make up the "roof". To address the priorities of women living with HIV in all their diversity and across their life course, the WCHC Model should be flexible in its delivery (e.g., single provider, interdisciplinary clinic or multiple providers) and implementation settings (e.g., urban, rural).
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".