Intimate relationships of<i>Devadasi</i>sex workers in South India: An exploration of risks of HIV/STI transmission
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Global literature on female sex workers suggests that being in an intimate relationship is associated with barriers to practising safe sex behaviours. Condom use within intimate relationships is often seen as a sign of infidelity and fosters mistrust which could affect longevity, trust and intimacy within partnerships. Using qualitative data from Devadasi sex workers and their intimate male partners in Bagalkot District, Karnataka, India, we examined both partners' perspectives to understand the quality and dynamics of these relationships and the factors that influence condom use in intimate relationships. Our thematic analysis of individual interviews conducted in May 2011 with 20 couples suggests that many Devadasi sex workers and their intimate partners define their relationships as 'like marriage' which reduced their motivation to use condoms. Evidence from this study suggests that active participation in sex workers' collectives (sanghas) can increase condom use, education and family planning services, among other things, and could be helpful for both Devadasis and their intimate partners to better understand and accept safer sexual practices. Our work has direct implications for designing couple-based health interventions for traditional Devadasi sex workers and their intimate partners in India.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".