Understanding motivations and resilience-associated factors to promote timely linkage to HIV care: a qualitative study among people living with HIV in western Kenya
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding motivations and resilience-associated factors that help people newly diagnosed with HIV link to care is critical in the context of universal test and treat. We analyzed 30 in-depth interviews (IDI) among adults aged 18 and older in western Kenya diagnosed with HIV during home-based counseling and testing and who had linked to HIV care. A directed content analysis was performed, categorizing IDI quotations into a table based on linkage stages for organization and then developing and applying codes from self-determination theory and the concept of resilience. Autonomous motivations, including internalized concerns for one's health and/or to provide care for family, were salient facilitators of accessing care. Controlled forms of motivation, such as fear or external pressure, were less salient. Social support was an important resilience-associated factor fostering linkage. HIV testing and counseling programs which incorporate motivational interviewing that emphasizes motivations related to one's health or family combined with a social support/navigator approach, may promote timely linkage to care.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".