Potential barriers and facilitators to future HIV vaccine acceptability and uptake among marginalised communities in Karnataka, south India: perspectives of frontline health service providers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
HIV in Karnataka, south India disproportionately burdens female sex workers (FSWs) and men who have sex with men (MSM). The best long-term strategy for managing the global HIV epidemic might involve a preventive vaccine; however, vaccine availability cannot guarantee its acceptability. An exploratory, cross-sectional study was conducted among frontline health service providers (HSPs) working with MSM/FSWs in relation to HIV-related health services in Karnataka. Face-to-face structured interviews were performed to better understand potential barriers/facilitators to acceptability/uptake of a future HIV vaccine among MSM/FSW communities. Descriptive analyses explored HSPs’ perceptions of vaccine acceptability/uptake and likelihood to recommend an HIV vaccine. Although HSPs mentioned numerous potential barriers to future HIV vaccine acceptability/uptake, most believed that MSM/FSWs would be willing to receive the vaccine to protect their health and avoid HIV. HSPs reported being very likely to recommend the vaccine, however young age of potential vaccine recipients negatively affected likelihood to recommend.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".