HIV awareness and condom use among female sex workers in Afghanistan: implications for intervention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is little information about HIV awareness or condom use among female sex workers (FSWs) in Afghanistan. The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to assess HIV awareness, knowledge, and condom use among FSWs in three Afghan cities. FSWs residing in Jalalabad, Kabul, and Mazar-i-Sharif were recruited through outreach programs and completed an interviewer-administered questionnaire and rapid tests for hepatitis B surface antigen, HIV, syphilis, and hepatitis C virus. Logistic regression identified factors associated with HIV awareness, comprehensive HIV knowledge (knowledge that HIV cannot be detected by sight, that condoms prevent HIV, and rejection of local misconceptions about HIV transmission), and consistent condom use (use with every sex act) with clients in the last six months. Of 520 participants, 76.9% had no formal education and 37.7% lived outside Afghanistan in the last five years. Nearly half (44.2%) were aware of HIV but, of these, only 17.4% (N = 40) had comprehensive HIV knowledge. There were significant differences by site; FSWs in Jalalabad were more likely to be aware of HIV but FSWs in Kabul were more likely to have correct HIV knowledge and use condoms consistently with clients. Consistent client condom use was reported by 11.5% (N = 60) and was independently associated with having more clients per month (AOR = 1.99, 95% CI: 1.04-3.81). In conclusion, comprehensive HIV knowledge and consistent condom use with clients are low among Afghan FSWs in these cities. Efforts to reach this population should focus on relaying accurate information and expanding condom use with clients.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".