Jaipur Framework for Managing HIV/AIDS: An Analysis of Socioeconomic Factors

This paper analyzes the Jaipur Framework for managing HIV/AIDS by examining the role of socioeconomic factors in the prevalence of the disease. The framework provides a means of understanding the social vulnerability and susceptibility of a specific population to disease, especially HIV. The paper examines the framework, analyzes it, and applies it to the case of HIV/AIDS.

Global Public Health 1
GLOBAL PUBLIC HEALTH
by
Student
Name
Course
Professor
Institution
Date

Global Public Health 2
Global Public Health
Introduction
While seeking to prevent HIV/AIDS in the population, social determinants have been
seen to play a leading role in the continued burden of the disease globally. The social
determinants of health (SDH) entail conditions where individuals are born, work, as well as grow
old, plus the power and resources that influence these everyday living conditions. HIV/AIDS as a
global endemic that has been widespread in many regions of the world has been linked to
socioeconomic factors that predispose an individual to the disease (Edwards & Collins, 2014, pp.
143). The inequitable distribution of underlying social determinants of health is the root cause of
inequalities in health. Jaipur paradigm is a framework that explains and predicts the HIV
epidemic. The paper will examine the framework; analyze the framework and apply the
framework on the case of HIV/AIDS.
Summary of the Jaipur Framework
Jaipur framework is a mode that provides an understanding of the social vulnerability and
susceptibility of a specific population to disease, especially HIV. The framework has been
instrumental in promoting the understanding of the social and economic factors in the society
that makes a country or a group of population to be susceptible and vulnerable to disease and
helps to provide the necessary interventions needed to manage the disease (Mabweazara et al.,
2019, pp. 257).
Socioeconomic Factors

Global Public Health 3
Socioeconomic factors are the primary social determinant of health (SDH) based on the
model that has resulted in an increased prevalence of HIV in the society. The declining income
has made people to resort to risk behaviors that make them susceptible to HIV epidemic.
Susceptibility to HIV infection in a society attributed, which has been created by the interaction
of many factors that determine the frequency in which the epidemic is spread. On the other hand,
based on the framework, vulnerability explains those characteristics of a socioeconomic entity,
which ascertain the harshness of the effect probable to be caused by additional death, as well as
morbidity (Jhajharia, Verma & Kumar, 2018, pp. 581). The framework allows for better
understanding of the relationship between the disease and socioeconomic status within a given
population to provide a clear framework that will be used to treat and manage the disease based
on the understanding of the prevailing social and economic factors as SDH.
Analysis of the Framework
Strengths
The Jaipur framework or model better provides a means through which an understanding
of the socioeconomic factors influences the prevalence of HIV among women in different
countries across the world. This is the strength of the model since it addresses the different
socioeconomic factors that influence HIV in the society offering a better understanding. In
addition, the framework provides an understanding by explaining the diverse epidemics through
developing indexes or statistical relationships. The other strength of the model is that it develops
a better understanding on the relationship between health, socioeconomic activity inequity, as
well as the extent of social accessibility in managing a disease (Schmidt-Sane, 2018, pp. 1715).

Global Public Health 4
Weaknesses
The model has weakness in that it does not address the other factors other than
socioeconomic factors that influence disease. In addition, the use of indexes and statistical
correlations in the model have not been successful in understanding the social determinants of
health since some nations are richer with a high prevalence of epidemics, which makes it a
weakness of the model. Also, some nations, in spite of economic and social development of
determinants of health pointing to the prospective for epidemics are not facing them where the
framework does not address (Crockett et al., 2019, pp. 272).
The framework offers four extensive logical “types” of society that are: high social
cohesion and high affluence; elevated social cohesion and stumpy wealth; small social structure
and low wealth; and low social cohesion and high prosperity. These types offer an improved
comprehending of the socioeconomic factors that impact the diseases in the society where
socioeconomic factors are social determinants of health within the broader society (Cotesta,
Cicchelli & Nocenzi, 2013, pp. 47).
Application of the Framework
The Jaipur paradigm is applicable in the case of the management of HIV infection. A new
research of 72 nations demonstrated that high city persons’ rates of disease by the HIV were
powerfully linked to low-income, as well as disparate sharing of revenue. A society with greater
levels of unity and income registered slow decline with low HIV prevalence, while society with
elevated degree of consistency along with low-income, the degree of infection was maintained
by socially defined behavior. In addition, the framework showed that nation with a low degree of

Global Public Health 5
social consistency plus low-income the infection will be high over time and many people will be
vulnerable to HIV, while a society with short levels of social consistency plus high earnings, it
will report a sharp amplify in incidence of HIV followed, optimistically, by a greater decrease
(Igulot & Magadi, 2018, pp, 11).
Consequently, this confirms that wealthy societies, like the United Kingdom (UK) record
a decline in the prevalence of HIV, while African nations like Senegal may report a greater
prevalence of HIV because of the low income and high level of cohesion in the society. Uganda
shows a high prevalence of HIV because of its low social unity plus low-income that places the
majority of the population at risk (Mendenhall, 2018, pp.647). Countries like South Africa shows
a society with low organization plus high-income and reports a sharp decline in HIV/AIDS
occurrence. The framework shows that socioeconomic factors that include social cohesion and
income typically become a social determinant of health that has a direct relationship with HIV
prevalence in the society. The framework shows that IEC programs are appropriate in managing
the behaviors of the population in the society through education and other interventions. The
Jaipur framework shows that another intervention is through social and economic development
are important in handling matters of parity, human rights and formation of “civil society”
(Schulz et al, 2012, pp. 1707). This implies that HIV interventions that disregard these concerns
might be ineffective in the long-run.
Commentary
The Jaipur paradigm is interesting and should be adopted by governments. The effect of a
long-wave HIV can be hard to perceive; however, the paradigm may supply some preliminary

Global Public Health 6
approaches in perceiving what is taking place, plus to what degree, as well as offer a thought of
the way interventions targeted at concerns of vulnerability, as well as susceptibility may be more
efficiently aimed in the perspective of social and economic expansion.

Global Public Health 7
References
Cotesta, V., Cicchelli, V., & Nocenzi, M. (2013). Global Society, Cosmopolitanism and Human
Rights. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Crockett, K. B., Edmonds, A., Johnson, M. O., Neilands, T. B., Kempf, M.-C., Konkle-Parker,
D., … Turan, B. (2019). “Neighborhood Racial Diversity, Socioeconomic Status, and
Perceptions of HIV-Related Discrimination and Internalized HIV Stigma Among Women Living
with HIV in the United States”. AIDS Patient Care & STDs, 33(6), 270–281.
Edwards, A.E. & Collins, C.B. (2014). “Exploring the influence of social determinants on HIV
risk behaviors and the potential application of struCtural interventions to prevent HIV in
women”. J Health Dispar Res Pract. 7(SI2):141-155.
Igulot, P., & Magadi, M. A. (2018). “Socioeconomic Status and Vulnerability to HIV Infection
in Uganda: Evidence from Multilevel Modelling of AIDS Indicator Survey Data”. AIDS
Research & Treatment, 3(1):1–15.
Jhajharia, S., Verma, S., & Kumar, R. (2018). “Risk factors, susceptibility, and machine learning
techniques for cancer prediction”. Drug Invention Today, 10(4), 580–592.
Mabweazara, S. Z., Leach, L. L., Ley, C., Smith, M., Jekauc, D., Dave, J., … Lambert, V. E.
(2019). “Physical activity behaviours of persons living with HIV of low socioeconomic status:
domain, intensity and sociodemographic correlates”. AIDS Care, 31(2), 255–259.
Mendenhall, R. (2018). “The Medicalization of Poverty in the Lives of Low-Income Black
Mothers and Children”. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 46(3), 644–650.

Global Public Health 8
Schmidt-Sane, M. M. (2018). “Community vulnerability and stratified risk: Hegemonic
masculinity, socioeconomic status, and HIV/AIDS in a sex work community in
Kampala, Uganda”. Global Public Health, 13(11), 1713–1724.
Schulz, A. J., Mentz, G., Lachance, L., Johnson, J., Gaines, C., & Israel, B. A. (2012).
“Associations Between Socioeconomic Status and Allostatic Load: Effects of Neighborhood
Poverty and Tests of Mediating Pathways”. American Journal of Public Health, 102(9), 1706–
1714.