Married men’s perceptions of barriers for HIV-positive pregnant women accessing highly active antiretroviral therapy in rural Uganda
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Putu Duff,1 Tom Rubaale,2 Walter Kipp1,21School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada; 2Community ARV Project, Fort Portal, UgandaBackground: The aim of this study was to describe the perceptions of married men about barriers to accessing and accepting highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) by pregnant/postnatal women positive for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and registered in Kabarole District’s Program for the Prevention of HIV from Mother to Child (PMTCT-Plus).Materials and methods: Our study was a qualitative descriptive exploratory study using thematic analysis. Four focus group discussions were held with a convenience sample of 40 married men.Results: Lack of disclosure of a positive HIV diagnosis to the partner and stigmatization of persons with HIV were two major obstacles for women in accessing HAART. In addition, men felt that their low knowledge of HAART and their low HIV testing rate also constituted important barriers to these women taking treatment. Men complained that they were not sufficiently involved in the reproductive care of women and that couples’ counseling could be a step towards addressing this problem.Conclusion: Barriers to HAART experienced by pregnant/postnatal women need to be addressed in order to improve their uptake of treatment, increase their low treatment coverage, improve their survival, and at the same time dramatically reduce HIV transmission from mother to child.Keywords: men, highly active antiretroviral therapy, pregnant women, Uganda
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".