MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3201412371 · doi:10.3390/ijerph18189654

Factors Affecting Motivation among Key Populations to Engage with Tuberculosis Screening and Testing Services in Northwest Tanzania: A Mixed-Methods Analysis

2021· article· en· W3201412371 on OpenAlexafffund
Rabia Abeid Khaji, Venance Muzuka Kabwebwe, Annasia Goodluck Mringo, Thomas Faustine Nkwabi, Jacob Bigio, Christina Mergenthaler, Nathaly Aguilera Vasquez, Tripti Pande, Md. Toufiq Rahman, Fredrick Haraka

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsTanzaniaThematic analysisIntervention (counseling)TuberculosisMedicineCommunity health workersScale (ratio)Environmental healthCommunity healthQualitative researchCommunity engagementNursingFamily medicinePsychologyGeographyPublic healthSocioeconomicsPopulationPublic relationsPolitical scienceHealth servicesSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In northwest Tanzania, many artisanal small-scale miners (ASMs) and female sex workers (FSWs) live in informal communities surrounding mines where tuberculosis (TB) is highly prevalent. An active case finding (ACF) intervention to increase TB case notification was undertaken in two districts. Alongside this, a study was implemented to understand engagement with the intervention through: (1) quantitative questionnaires to 128 ASMs and FSWs, who either engaged or did not engage in the ACF intervention, to assess their views on TB; (2) qualitative interviews with 41 ASMs and FSWs, 36 community health workers (CHWs) and 30 community stakeholders. The mean perceived severity of TB score was higher in the engaged than in the non-engaged group (p = 0.01). Thematic analysis showed that health-seeking behaviour was similar across both groups but that individuals in the non-engaged group were more reluctant to give sputum samples, often because they did not understand the purpose. CHWs feared contracting TB on the job, and many noted that mining areas were difficult to access without transportation. Community stakeholders provided various recommendations to increase engagement. This study highlights reasons for engagement with a large-scale ACF intervention targeting key populations and presents insights from implementers and stakeholders on the implementation of the intervention.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.153
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.293 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public HealthSame topicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual RiskFrench-language works237,207