MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046379086 · doi:10.7448/ias.18.1.19462

Experiences of coercion to sterilize and forced sterilization among women living with HIV in Latin America

2015· article· en· W2046379086 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Tamil Kendall, Claire Albert

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the International AIDS Society · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchFord Foundation
KeywordsMedicineSterilization (economics)Family medicineHealth careLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Forced and coerced sterilization is an internationally recognized human rights violation reported by women living with HIV (WLHIV) around the globe. Forced sterilization occurs when a person is sterilized without her knowledge or informed consent. Coerced sterilization occurs when misinformation, intimidation tactics, financial incentives or access to health services or employment are used to compel individuals to accept the procedure. METHODS: Drawing on community-based research with 285 WLHIV from four Latin American countries (El Salvador, Honduras, Mexico and Nicaragua), we conduct thematic qualitative analysis of reports of how and when healthcare providers pressured women to sterilize and multivariate logistic regression to assess whether social and economic characteristics and fertility history were associated with pressure to sterilize. RESULTS: A quarter (23%) of the participant WLHIV experienced pressure to sterilize post-diagnosis. WLHIV who had a pregnancy during which they (and their healthcare providers) knew their HIV diagnosis were almost six times more likely to experience coercive or forced sterilization than WLHIV who did not have a pregnancy with a known diagnosis (OR 5.66 CI 95% 2.35-13.58 p≤0.001). WLHIV reported that healthcare providers told them that living with HIV annulled their right to choose the number and spacing of their children and their contraceptive method, employed misinformation about the consequences of a subsequent pregnancy for women's and children's health, and denied medical services needed to prevent vertical (mother-to-child) HIV transmission to coerce women into accepting sterilization. Forced sterilization was practiced during caesarean delivery. CONCLUSIONS: The experiences of WLHIV indicate that HIV-related stigma and discrimination by healthcare providers is a primary driver of coercive and forced sterilization. WLHIV are particularly vulnerable when seeking maternal health services. Health worker training on HIV and reproductive rights, improving counselling on HIV and sexual and reproductive health for WLHIV, providing State mechanisms to investigate and sanction coercive and forced sterilization, and strengthening civil society to increase WLHIV's capacity to resist coercion to sterilize can contribute to preventing coercive and forced sterilization. Improved access to judicial and non-judicial mechanisms to procure justice for women who have experienced reproductive rights violations is also needed.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.216
Threshold uncertainty score0.148

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations60
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the International AIDS SocietySame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207