Examining the Influence of Pre-HAART Experiences on Older, Self-Identifying Gay Men’s Contemporary Constructions of Quality of Life (QOL)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Some older gay men (50+) experience diminished quality of life (QOL) due to historical and ongoing discrimination in addition to living through a collective trauma-the pre-HAART era of the HIV/AIDS epidemic-characterized by the absence of treatment and rampant discrimination targeting gay men. A growing body of literature, however, illustrates that older gay men demonstrate remarkable resilience but little is known about how QOL is conceptualized and how these conceptualizations are potentially shaped by pre-HAART experiences. The current study drew on constructivist grounded theory methods to examine how QOL is conceptualized in light of the sociohistorical relevance of pre-HAART. Twenty Canadian based gay men aged 50+ participated in semi-structured interviews via Zoom. Ultimately, QOL is understood as experiencing contentment, which is made possible by the development and implementation of three key processes: (1) developing and cultivating meaningful connections, (2) growing into and embracing identity, and (3) appreciating the capacity to do what brings joy. QOL for this group is greatly informed by a context of disadvantage, and the demonstrated resilience warrants further investigation to meaningfully support the overall well-being of older gay men.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".