Correlates of HIV stigma in HIV-positive women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined the variables associated with HIV stigma in HIV-positive women currently living in Ontario, Canada. Based on previous literature, we predicted that variables of social marginalization (e.g., ethnicity, income, education), medical variables (e.g., higher CD4 count, lower viral load), and increased psychological distress would be associated with higher perceived HIV stigma among HIV-positive women. One hundred fifty-nine HIV-positive women between the ages of 18 and 52 in Ontario completed self-report measures of the aforementioned variables. Women were recruited through 28 AIDS service organizations, eight HIV clinics, and two community health centers. In multiple regression analyses, for women born in Canada, lower educational level and higher anxiety were associated with higher HIV stigma. For women born outside of Canada, having been judged by a physician in Canada for trying to become pregnant was associated with higher HIV stigma. For HIV-positive women born outside of Canada, negative judgment by a physician regarding intentions to become pregnant should be addressed to reduce perceived HIV stigma and vice versa. Health care providers should be trained in the provision of sensitive and effective health care for women living with HIV, especially when providing reproductive health 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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".