MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4378619326 · doi:10.3390/ijerph20115979

Pandemic upon Pandemic: Middle-Aged and Older Men Who Have Sex with Men Living with HIV Coping and Thriving during the Peak of COVID-19

2023· article· en· W4378619326 on OpenAlexaff
Sherry Bell, Brandon Ranuschio, John M. Waldron, Lianne Barnes, Nadia Sheik-Yosef, Esmeralda Villalobos, Janelle Wackens, Renato M. Liboro

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicMental healthThematic analysisSocial isolationCoping (psychology)ThrivingQualitative researchPsychologyGerontologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)SociologyMedicinePsychiatryDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)Social science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When the COVID-19 pandemic emerged in early 2020, not only did it abruptly impede the progress that was being made toward achieving global targets to end the HIV pandemic, but it also created significant impacts on the physical and mental health of middle-aged and older men who have sex with men living with HIV. Utilizing a qualitative, community-based participatory research approach, we conducted semi-structured, one-on-one interviews with 16 ethnoracially diverse, middle-aged and older men who have sex with men living with HIV residing in Southern Nevada, to examine the different ways the COVID-19 pandemic directly impacted their physical and mental health, and explore how they eventually coped and thrived during the peak of the crisis. Using thematic analysis to analyze our interview data, we identified three prominent themes: (1) challenges to obtaining credible health information, (2) the physical and mental health impacts of the COVID-19-pandemic-imposed social isolation, and (3) digital technologies and online connections for medical and social purposes. In this article, we extensively discuss these themes, the current discourse on these themes in academic literature, and how the perspectives, input, and lived experiences of our participants during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic could be critical to addressing issues they had already been experiencing prior to the emergence of the pandemic in 2020, and just as importantly, helping us best prepare in stark anticipation of the next potentially devastating pandemic.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.078
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.313 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health→Same topicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions→French-language works237,207→