A systematic review of psychosocial challenges for MSM living with HIV among diverse and intersecting minorities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Men who have sex with men (MSM) living with HIV have been studied extensively for stigmatization and inequitable factors affecting well-being. Although intersecting factors are acknowledged in some studies, they are rarely discussed in the context of health implications among multiple minority identities. This leaves psychosocial research outputs to focus their efforts among less stigmatized MSM groups, white men, while disregarding specific issues among historically marginalized MSM-related identities (e.g., racialized, Indigenous, and aging populations). As per the 95-95-95 goals set by the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV and AIDS, this systematic review covers psychosocial protective and risk factors experienced by HIV-positive MSM while also considering other intersecting identities. Following a standardized search inquiry, 2,139 records were identified and narrowed down to 24 peer-reviewed articles which were systematically reviewed. Psychological and social protective factors are contextually described. Some risk factors such as co-occurring stigmas, psychological distress, exposure to violence, and trauma among diverse MSM can potentiate greater risk-taking behaviours associated with HIV transmission among HIV-positive men. These findings highlight factors that contribute to resilient pathways among racialized minorities and other intersections among MSM while also examining specific psychological stressors. Tailored interventions and care for minorities with intersecting identities, with a focus on co-occurring stigmas, are crucial to ensure the well-being of diverse HIV-positive MSM and reduce HIV transmission. We propose an adaptation to the minority stress model to refine available tools and provide future studies with more accurate depictions of the lived experiences among diverse MSM.
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 | 0.006 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.018 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".