A mixed methods descriptive study of a diverse cohort of African American/Black and Latine young and emerging adults living with HIV: Sociodemographic, background, and contextual factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: American/Black and Latine (AABL) young/emerging adults living with HIV in the United States (US) have consistently failed to meet targets for HIV care/medication engagement. Among this population, those with non-suppressed HIV viral load are understudied, along with immigrants and those with serious socioeconomic deprivation. Guided by social action theory, we took a mixed methods approach (sequential explanatory design) to describe sociodemographic, background, and contextual factors, and their relationships to HIV management, among a diverse cohort. METHODS: Participants (N = 271) received structured baseline assessments and HIV viral load testing. Primary outcomes were being well-engaged in HIV care and HIV viral suppression. A subset (N = 41) was purposively sampled for maximum variability for in-depth interviews. Quantitative data were analyzed with descriptive statistics and logistic regression, and used to develop a research question about life contexts. Qualitative data were analyzed with directed content analysis, and the joint display method was used to integrate results. RESULTS: Participants were 25 years old, on average (SD = 2). The majority (59%) were Latine/Hispanic and the reminder African American/Black. Almost all were assigned male sex at birth (96%) and sexual minorities (93%). Half (49%) were born outside the US and 33% spoke primarily Spanish. They were diagnosed with HIV four years prior on average (SD = 3). Most were well-engaged in HIV care (72%) and evidenced viral suppression (81%). Speaking Spanish was associated with a higher odds of care engagement, and adverse childhood experiences and income from federal benefits were associated with a lower odds. None of the factors predicted viral suppression. Qualitative results highlighted both developmentally typical (insufficient financial resources, unstable housing) and atypical challenges (struggles with large bureaucracies, HIV disclosure, daily medication use). Federal benefits and the local HIV social services administration were critical to survival. Immigrant participants came to the US to escape persecution and receive HIV care, but HIV management was often disrupted. Overall qualitative results highlighted both risk and protective factors, and resilience. Qualitative results added detail, nuance, and richness to the quantitative findings. CONCLUSIONS: The present study advances what is known about the backgrounds and contexts of diverse and understudied AABL young/emerging adults living with HIV.
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 | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".