Title: Women Initiated Solutions for HIV Prevention (WISH Study): Factors Associated with Intentions to Use Microbicides and Tenofovir. Abstract approved:
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With women comprising nearly 50 % of HIV/AIDS infections globally, the development of new woman-initiated HIV prevention methods has become a public health imperative. To date, the female condom and the diaphragm are the only woman-initiated prevention methods available on the consumer market. Recent research has focused on two HIV/AIDS prevention technologies undergoing clinical trials: microbicides and tenofovir (PrEP). Both are being touted as female-initiated HIV/AIDS prevention technologies that women can use covertly, without a partner’s knowledge, to improve their odds in protecting themselves against HIV. Use of these new technologies will not only depend on their effectiveness, but on women’s willingness to use these products. This cross-sectional study used an integrative conceptual model that included both intrapersonal and interpersonal constructs to explore factors associated with women’s intentions to use. Three hundred and forty-eight high-risk women in Toronto, Canada completed self-administered questionnaires (SAQs). Results were remarkably consistent across relationship types and prevention methods examined in the study, with 60 % of the women intending to use microbicides and tenofovir. Women who perceived
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".