Syndemic perspective of how people living with HIV faced the COVID-19 crisis in North Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 2020-2023 COVID-19 pandemic impacted societies and healthcare access worldwide, including HIV services. Changes in access exacerbated social inequalities in health among socially underserved groups including people living with HIV (PLHIV). This study aimed to explore PLHIV's psychosocial experience of the COVID-19 pandemic in the MENA region using a syndemic approach. Sixty-three interviews were conducted with PLHIV between October 2020 and December 2021 in Tunisia, Morocco and Algeria. We conducted a thematic content analysis of the full corpus. Results from the syndemic framework showed that living with HIV in a pandemic context intersected with PLHIV's socioeconomic conditions, exacerbating their overall disease burden. Interviewees' experiences of the pandemic were closely associated with their HIV seropositive status and related socioeconomic constraints. To improve prevention, preparedness, and response for future pandemics, a global approach to health that incorporates syndemic and intersectional perspectives is needed. Such an approach would help to address the health, social and economic constraints that vulnerable groups face, and would ensure more effective and equitable public health responses.
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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".