MOTIVATIONS FOR ENTRY INTO SEX WORK AND HIV RISK AMONG MOBILE FEMALE SEX WORKERS IN INDIA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper assesses the reasons for entry into sex work and its association with HIV risk behaviours among mobile female sex workers (FSWs) in India. Data were collected from a cross-sectional survey conducted in 22 districts across four high HIV prevalence states in India during 2007-2008. Analyses were limited to 5498 eligible mobile FSWs. The reasons given by FSWs for entering sex work and associations with socio-demographic characteristics were assessed. Reported reasons for entering sex work include poor or deprived economic conditions; negative social circumstances in life; own choice; force by an external person; and family tradition. The results from multivariate analyses indicate that those FSWs who entered sex work due to poor economic conditions or negative social circumstances in life or force demonstrated elevated levels of current inconsistent condom use as well as in the past in comparison with those FSWs who reported entering sex work by choice or family tradition. This finding indicates the need for a careful assessment of the pre-entry contexts among HIV prevention interventions since these factors may continue to hinder the effectiveness of efforts to reduce the spread of HIV/AIDS in India and elsewhere.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".