Vulnerable young women and frontline service providers identify options to improve the HIV-sensitivity of social protection programmes in Botswana: A modified Policy Delphi approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Poverty, lack of education and gender inequality make unemployed and out-of-school young women extremely vulnerable to HIV infection. Promotive social protection programmes aim to increase livelihood and capabilities and could empower this priority population to act on HIV prevention choices. In Botswana, they rarely benefit from such programmes.A modified Policy Delphi engaged a panel of 22 unemployed and out-of-school young women and eight frontline service providers to consider alternative policy and practice options, and tailor available programmes to their own needs and social situation. The panel assessed the desirability and feasibility of improvement proposals and, in a second round, ranked them for relative importance.Nearly all 40 improvement proposals were considered very desirable and definitely, or possibly, feasible, and panellists prioritised a wide range of proposals. Frontline service providers stressed foundational skills, like life skills and second chance education. Young women preferred options with more immediate benefits. Overall, panellists perceived positive role models for programme delivery, access to land and water, job skills training, and stipends as most important to empower HIV-vulnerable young women. Results suggest ample policy space to make existing social protection programmes in Botswana more inclusive of unemployed and out-of-school young women, hence more HIV-sensitive.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".