MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414347107 · doi:10.1080/09540121.2025.2560100

Awareness of HIV among Bangladeshi women: evidence from the MICS dataset

2025· article· en· W4414347107 on OpenAlexaff
Shahadat Hossain, Fariha Kadir, Muhammad Ihsan- Ul- Kabir, Maruf Hasan Rumi

Bibliographic record

VenueAIDS Care · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Health Economics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocioeconomic statusLogistic regressionCluster (spacecraft)Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Vulnerability (computing)Descriptive statisticsTransmission (telecommunications)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bangladesh exhibits a low prevalence of HIV; however, socioeconomic and gender disparities contribute to an increased vulnerability among women, primarily due to limited awareness of transmission methods, preventive measures, and testing services. This study employs data from the Multiple Indicators Cluster Survey (MICS) 2019, utilizing descriptive statistics, Chi-square tests, and logistic regression analyses to examine the influence of socio-demographic factors, educational attainment, and media exposure on HIV awareness. The findings indicate a moderate level of awareness, albeit accompanied by widespread misconceptions; only 27.5% of women knew where to access testing services. Women residing in urban areas, possessing higher education levels, belonging to wealthier households, and with media exposure demonstrated significantly higher awareness levels. Disparities are evident across different regions, notably in Barishal and Mymensingh. Futhermore, women with higher secondary education exhibited a 17.5-fold increase in HIV knowledge compared to those with primary education. The study underscores the importance of targeted educational initiatives, media campaigns, and enhanced testing acessibility, particularly in underserved regions, to improve awareness and mitigate stigma.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.380
Threshold uncertainty score0.426

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIDS CareSame topicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual RiskFrench-language works237,207