Exploring Experiences with Social Inclusion, Food Security and Housing Among People Living with HIV: A Qualitative Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: This two-phase study explored the impact of the social determinants of health on people living with HIV (PLWH) in Waterloo Region, Ontario, in partnership with the AIDS Committee of Cambridge, Kitchener, Waterloo Area (ACCKWA). Phase 1 explored broader experiences related to social inclusion, food security, and housing. Phase 2 expanded into decision-making and navigating challenges related to these experiences. Methods: Participants were eligible to be a part of the study if they were an ACCKWA service user living with HIV over the age of 18. The samples per phase included 9 and 11 participants, respectively, who participated in semi-structured interviews. The interviews were transcribed and coded for themes using NVivo software. Results: Each phase supported previous research related to food, transportation, housing, and social challenges. Key themes identified in both phases included challenges related to food, housing, transportation, and social life. Separately, Phase 1 and Phase 2 found themes of resilience and strategic thinking, respectively. Our findings suggested a high prevalence of misinformation related to HIV and the absence of structural resources, forcing PLWH to be resilient, and make decisions about their life and health strategically. Conclusion: Our study suggests that as PLWH demonstrate resilience, society's responsibility to protect disadvantaged populations is diminished. Through the allocation of funding towards food and housing, and educational campaigns, structural support can be established to facilitate the improvement of resources.
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 | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| 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".