Exploring inter‐ and intra‐organisational dynamics supporting task‐shifting opportunities in <scp>AIDS</scp> service organisations: A qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Task-shifting of combination sexual health services from clinicians to community workers has been well-studied in low-resource settings, but lacks empirical examination as a response to service inequities in North American community-based AIDS service organisations (ASOs). This study adopts a qualitative exploratory approach to understanding how ASOs may support task-shifting for gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM), drawing from interviews (n = 33) with clinicians and community workers in southern Ontario. Results include intra-organisational (including resource supports, development of community worker roles, providing task-shifting training, provider representation and inclusive service environment) and inter-organisational (including structure of engagement, streamlining referrals, development of effective partnerships, development of a formal organisational network and increasing awareness) dynamics which, when applied at an organisation level within ASOs, encourage successful and effective task-shifting. Related activities may be used to increase service quality and access for GBMSM. Considerations for application and management practice is provided.
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 | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".