MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2217554694 · doi:10.1186/s12889-015-2491-x

Work environments and HIV prevention: a qualitative review and meta-synthesis of sex worker narratives

2015· review· en· W2217554694 on OpenAlexaff
Shira M. Goldenberg, Putu Duff, Andrea Krüsi

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Public Health · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSex work and related issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaSt. Paul's Hospital
FundersNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute on Drug AbuseUnited Nations Population FundBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsSex workNarrativeQualitative researchCondomAgency (philosophy)Gender studiesSociologySocial psychologyPublic relationsMedicinePsychologyPolitical scienceHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Social science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Sex workers (SWs) experience a disproportionately high burden of HIV, with evidence indicating that complex and dynamic factors within work environments play a critical role in mitigating or producing HIV risks in sex work. In light of sweeping policy efforts to further criminalize sex work globally, coupled with emerging calls for structural responses situated in labour and human-rights frameworks, this meta-synthesis of the qualitative and ethnographic literature sought to examine SWs' narratives to elucidate the ways in which physical, social and policy features of diverse work environments influence SWs' agency to engage in HIV prevention. METHODS: We conducted a meta-synthesis of qualitative and ethnographic studies published from 2008 to 2014 to elucidate SWs' narratives and lived experiences of the complex and nuanced ways in which physical, social, and policy features of indoor and outdoor work environments shape HIV prevention in the sex industry. RESULTS: Twenty-four qualitative and/or ethnographic studies were included in this meta-synthesis. SWs' narratives revealed the nuanced ways that physical, social, and policy features of work environments shaped HIV risk and interacted with macrostructural constraints (e.g., criminalization, stigma) and community determinants (e.g., sex worker empowerment initiatives) to shape SWs' agency in negotiating condom use. SWs' narratives revealed the ways in which the existence of occupational health and safety standards in indoor establishments, as well as protective practices of third parties (e.g., condom promotion) and other SWs/peers were critical ways of enhancing safety and sexual risk negotiation within indoor work environments. Additionally, working in settings where negative interactions with law enforcement were minimized (e.g., working in decriminalized contexts or environments in which peers/managers successfully deterred unjust policing practices) was critical for supporting SWs' agency to negotiate HIV prevention. CONCLUSIONS: Policy reforms to remove punitive approaches to sex work, ensure supportive workplace standards and policies, and foster SWs' ability to work collectively are recommended to foster the realization of SWs' health and human rights across diverse settings. Future qualitative and mixed-methods research is recommended to ensure that HIV policies and programmes are grounded in SWs' voices and realities, particularly in more under-represented regions such as Eastern Europe and Sub-Saharan Africa.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.950
Threshold uncertainty score0.943

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.264
GPT teacher head0.475
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations80
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Public HealthSame topicSex work and related issuesFrench-language works237,207