MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966247488 · doi:10.1177/107780120200800902

The Everyday Occurrence

2002· article· en· W1966247488 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kendra Nixon, Leslie M. Tutty, Pamela Downe, Kelly Gorkoff, Jane Ursel

Bibliographic record

VenueViolence Against Women · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSex work and related issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMainstreamDomestic violenceSexual abuseSuicide preventionQualitative researchPoison controlHuman factors and ergonomicsSexual violenceOccupational safety and healthInjury preventionCriminologyMedicineGender studiesPsychologyPsychiatryPolitical scienceSociologyEnvironmental healthLawSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article reports the results of qualitative interviews with 47 women involved in prostitution from three western Canadian provinces. More than two thirds of the women had become involved at age 15 or younger. The respondents described high rates of violence perpetrated against them. They reported considerable childhood sexual abuse, most often by a family member or by caretakers while they were living in foster care or group homes. The young women continued to experience violence as prostitutes so commonplace that it almost seemed “normal.” They were victimized by pimps, johns, other prostituted women, intimate partners, and representatives from mainstream society and members of the police. This article describes their experiences of violence, the associated health problems, the protective strategies they used, and their attempts to leave the streets. The conclusion suggests ways in which agencies and policies could better address the violence experienced by these young women.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score0.322

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations158
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueViolence Against WomenSame topicSex work and related issuesFrench-language works237,207