Evaluating experiences of HIV-related stigma among people living with HIV diagnosed in different treatment eras in British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is mixed evidence on whether experiences of HIV-related stigma are mitigated with lived experience. We sought to examine whether people living with HIV (PLWH) with longer living experience reported varying levels of HIV-related stigma. Between January 2016-September 2018, we used purposive sampling to enrol PLWH aged ≥19 across British Columbia, Canada, where participants completed the 10-item Berger HIV Stigma Scale. We conducted bivariate analyzes examining key sociodemographic characteristics and HIV-related stigma scores. Multivariable linear regression modelled the association between year of HIV diagnosis by treatment era and HIV-related stigma scores. We enrolled 644 participants; median age at enrolment was 50 years (Q1–Q3: 42–56), with 37.4% (n = 241) diagnosed before the year 2000. The median HIV-stigma scores of all participants (19.0, Q1–Q3: 13–25, range 0–40) stratified by treatment era were: 17.0 (pre-1996), 20.0 (1996–1999), 20.0 (2000–2009), 19.0 (2010–2018) (p = 0.03). While there was a significant association at the univariate level, year of HIV diagnosis by treatment era was not associated with stigma scores after controlling for age, gender, HIV key populations, ethnicity, relationship status, social support, and ever having a mental health disorder diagnosis. This suggests that PLWH still experience HIV-related stigma today, compared to those diagnosed in earlier time periods.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".