Commentary: Healthcare Lived Experiences of African, Caribbean, and Black Individuals in Alberta living with HIV/AIDS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite biomedical advances that have made HIV a manageable chronic illness and the outcry over increasing access to care for marginalized groups, African, Caribbean, and Black (ACB) communities in Canada still experience disproportionate HIV rates and worse health outcomes related to HIV. A recent phenomenological study by Osuji, Domingo, and Olokude (2025) examines the lived experiences of ACB individuals in Alberta as they navigate HIV care. Objective: This commentary critically analyses the findings of this study through the lenses of Critical Race Theory, intersectionality, public health policy, and health equity. Discussion: This study's themes—health literacy and empowerment, non-belonging and invisibility, barriers to adherence, and psychosocial life impact—highlight how structural racism, stigma, and systemic neglect influence HIV care for ACB populations in Alberta. This commentary asserts that these inequities are not incidental but are deeply embedded in healthcare systems and broader societal structures. The invisibility of ACB people within HIV policy and data exemplifies structural racism, leading to poorer health outcomes and wider failures in public health. Implications: Public health policies and practices must prioritize culturally responsive care, community-based interventions, disaggregated data collection, psychosocial support, and reforms to address the social determinants of health. Without intentional action, Canada will not achieve its HIV elimination targets or uphold its commitment to equity. Conclusion: Ending HIV requires more than biomedical solutions. It involves dismantling systemic racism, fostering a sense of belonging, and creating inclusive systems where Black lives are visible, valued, and supported.
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 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.017 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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".