MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4402941020 · doi:10.1186/s12889-024-20131-6

An evolutionary concept analysis: stigma among women living with hepatitis C

2024· article· en· W4402941020 on OpenAlexafffund
Chelsea Masterman, Andrew Mendlowitz, Camelia Capraru, Karen Campbell, Genevieve Eastabrook, Mark H. Yudin, Tatyana Kushner, Jennifer A. Flemming, Jordan J. Feld, Yolanda Babenko‐Mould, Panagiota Tryphonopoulos, Mia J. Biondi

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Public Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Education
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of TorontoYork UniversityToronto Liver CentreWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineBiostatisticsStigma (botany)Public healthEpidemiologyEnvironmental healthGerontologyPsychiatryNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Stigma is a complex social phenomenon that leads to marginalization and influences the course of illness. In the context of hepatitis C virus (HCV), stigma is a well-documented barrier to accessing care, treatment, and cure. In recent years, HCV rates among women have increased, resulting in an urgent need to address stigma and its harmful effects. The purpose of this concept analysis was to investigate stigma in the context of women living with HCV using Rodgers' evolutionary method. METHODS: PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Medline, PsycINFO, and Nursing and Allied Health were used to identify articles describing HCV stigma among women. Articles from peer-reviewed journals and geographic locations, published between 2002-2023, were included in the analysis. As specified in Rodgers' evolutionary method, articles were analyzed with a focus on the concept's context, surrogate and related terms, antecedents, attributes, examples, and consequences. RESULTS: Following screening, 33 articles were selected for inclusion in the analysis. Discrimination and marginalization were identified as surrogate and related terms to stigma; and antecedents of stigma were identified as limited knowledge, fear of diagnosis, and disclosure. Prevalent attributes of stigma in the literature were described as feelings of decreased self-worth, negative stereotyping, and fear of transmission. Importantly, HCV stigma among women is unique in comparison to other forms of infectious disease-related stigma, primarily due its impact on women's identity as mothers and caregivers. Stigmatization of women living with HCV resulted in negative consequences to personal relationships and healthcare access due to decreased health-seeking behaviours. Although access to HCV treatment has changed considerably over time, a temporal analysis could not be completed due to the limited number of articles. CONCLUSIONS: Stigma in the context of women living with HCV has its own unique antecedents, attributes, and consequences. This enhanced understanding of stigma among women living with HCV has the potential to inform improved and more effective approaches to care, which will be required to reach HCV elimination. Furthermore, this analysis identifies stigma layering and stigma in the direct-acting antiviral treatment era as areas for more in-depth future inquiry.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0160.012
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Public Health→Same topicDiabetes Management and Education→French-language works237,207→