Assez d’enfants: Reproduction, risque et besoin « nonsatisfait » chez les gens qui suivent un traitementantirétroviral en Ouganda de l’Ouest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we use survey (n=87) and interview (n=30) data to investigate orientations towards future childbearing among people receiving antiretroviral treatment and their family members in western Uganda. We investigate how reproductive options are perceived, by those receiving treatment and those closest to them, and consider what these perceptions suggest about the existence of an “unmet need” for birth control for women with HIV. While most people say they do not wish to have more children while on treatment, this intention coexists with contradictory desires for the benefits and happiness that more children might bring. We argue that the factors influencing birth desires and outcomes are so complex and contradictory that it is virtually impossible to predict demand or uptake of birth control as more and more people with AIDS in Africa gain the ability to access antiretroviral treatments (Afr J Reprod Health 2012; 16[1]:133-144).
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".