Intersectional Stigma and Implementation of HIV Prevention and Treatment Services for Adolescents Living with and at Risk for HIV: Opportunities for Improvement in the HIV Continuum in Sub-Saharan Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adolescents in sub-Saharan Africa, specifically adolescent girls and young women, young men who have sex with men, transgender persons, persons who use substances, and adolescents experiencing homelessness experience intersectional stigma, have a high incidence of HIV and are less likely to be engaged in HIV prevention and care. We conducted a thematic analysis informed by the Health and Discrimination Framework using a multiple case study design with five case studies in 3 sub-Saharan African countries. Our analysis found commonalities in adolescents' intersectional stigma experiences across cases, despite different contexts. We characterize how intersectional stigma impacts the uptake and implementation of HIV prevention and treatment services along the continuum for adolescents. Findings reveal how intersectional stigma operates across social-ecological levels and worsens HIV-related outcomes for adolescents. We identify opportunities for implementation science research to address stigma-related barriers to the uptake and delivery of HIV services for adolescents in sub-Saharan Africa.
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 | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".