Social Construction of HIV Transmission and Prevention Among Heterosexual
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The social construction of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) transmission and prevention is explored using data obtained from 25 in-depth interviews conducted with French- and English-speaking college students, aged 17-22 years old, in Montreal. The content of common sense knowledge, its relationship to scientifi-cally based safer-sex guidelines, and the strategies used by young adults to construct their reality of Human Immuno-deficiency Virus (HIV) transmission and prevention are described. A single rule of HIV protection predominated for these young adults: protection through selection of uninfected partners. The implementation of this rule varied based on gender and sexual experience. The gender based rules and roles reflect a continuing double standard with respect to sexual activity which result in differences in men's and women i ability to protect themselves and in the content of constructed safer-sex strategies. Implications of these findings for educational policy are discussed. From a biomedical perspective, there are several characteristics of HIV, the virus consid-ered to cause AIDS, which directly influence its sexual transmission and prevention of its transmission. These characteristics include the possibility of transmitting HIV through vagi-nal and anal intercourse, a prolonged asymptomatic infectious period, and the ability to pre-vent or reduce the risk of sexual transmission of HIV by abstaining from or using condoms
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".