MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7131238984 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.18754819

Social Media Influencers and HIV/AIDS Awareness in Northern Nigerian Communities: A Comparative Study

2002· article· en· W7131238984 on OpenAlexaff
Obiakọwé Adekunle, Nkechi Omotayo, Femi Olayinka

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedia Influence and Health
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfluencer marketingCommunity engagementSocial mediaPublic healthPsychological interventionStigma (botany)Social marketingPublic engagementCommunity healthBrand community

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social media influencers (SMIs) have become influential in shaping public health perceptions globally. In Nigeria, particularly in northern communities where HIV/AIDS is prevalent, SMIs are increasingly being utilised to promote awareness and education about the disease. A comparative analysis was conducted using survey data collected from two randomly selected northern Nigerian communities with varying numbers of active SMIs. Quantitative content analysis evaluated the frequency and tone of posts promoting HIV/AIDS awareness. Audience surveys measured knowledge levels before and after exposure to SMI campaigns. The study found that SMIs in both communities predominantly focused on prevention methods, stigma reduction, and support resources. However, there was a notable difference in engagement rates between the two areas: Community A had an average post engagement rate of 35% compared to Community B's 20%. Audience knowledge levels increased by 14 percentage points after exposure. This study provides insights into how SMIs can be leveraged for public health initiatives in northern Nigerian communities, with potential implications for resource allocation and policy development. Public health officials should consider partnerships with local SMIs to enhance HIV/AIDS awareness campaigns. Future research could explore the long-term impact of these interventions on community health outcomes. Model estimation used $\hat{\theta}=argmin_{\theta}\sum_i\ell(y_i,f_\theta(x_i))+\lambda\lVert\theta\rVert_2^2$, with performance evaluated using out-of-sample error.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.247
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.122 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicMedia Influence and HealthFrench-language works237,207