MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029108521 · doi:10.1080/09540121.2012.736607

Understanding the role of peer group membership in reducing HIV-related risk and vulnerability among female sex workers in Karnataka, India

2013· article· en· W2029108521 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAIDS Care · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSex work and related issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaManitoba Health
FundersWorld Bank GroupBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsFocus groupCondomDemographyGonorrheaContext (archaeology)MedicinePropensity score matchingPeer groupChlamydiaVulnerability (computing)PsychologySyphilisHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Family medicineSocial psychologyGeographyImmunologySurgeryComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Karnataka state, South India, we analyzed the role of membership in peer groups in reducing HIV-related risk and vulnerability among female sex workers (FSWs). Data from three surveys conducted in Karnataka, a behavioral tracking survey and two rounds of integrated biological and behavioral assessments (IBBAs), were analyzed. Using propensity score matching, we examined the impact of group membership on selected outcomes, including condom use, experience of violence, access to entitlements, and the prevalence of sexually transmitted infections, including HIV infection. Focus group discussions were conducted with the FSWs to better understand their perceptions regarding membership in peer groups. Peer group members participating in the IBBAs had a lower prevalence of gonorrhea and/or chlamydia (5.2 vs 9.6%, p<0.001), and of syphilis (8.2 vs 10.3%, p<0.05), compared to non-members. The average treatment effect for selected outcome measures, from the propensity score matching, showed that FSWs who were members of any peer group reported significantly less experience of violence in the past six months, were less likely to have bribed police to avoid trouble in the past six months, and were more likely to have obtained at least one formal identification document in the past five years, compared to non-members. In focus group discussions, group members indicated that they had more confidence in dealing with situations of forced sex and violence. Including community mobilization and peer group formation in the context of HIV prevention programing can reduce HIV-related risk and vulnerability among FSWs.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.410
Threshold uncertainty score0.962

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.244 · 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