LBP-1.05 Challenges and barriers for conducting STI/HIV prevention projects targeting female sex workers within national programs in Benin and Niger
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context In West Africa, HIV/STIs prevention activities targeting female sex workers (FSW) and their partners were developed and supported financially through a bilateral cooperation project. After the end of the project in Benin (2006) and Niger (2007), the national HIV/STI programs took over these interventions. Objectives (i) to identify the challenges and barriers for FSW program interventions within national programs; (ii) to assess the capacity of FSW dedicated services to treat and prevent STI efficiently. Methods A triangulation of methods and sources of data collection were used within an evaluative approach centered on the use of the results, such as individual and collective interviews, review of data records from health centers and field observations. Quantitative data from clinical attendance were crossed with qualitative data. A conceptual framework was developed to explain the exploratory and analytical elements. The main findings were validated with the stakeholders. Results There are several constraints and major challenges facing STI/HIV prevention under the responsibility of national programs, namely: (i) the deficit of synergies between two major components (communication for behavioural change and medical follow-ups), (ii) the lack of coordination and actions in the field, (iii) the abandonment of structural activities, (iv) low resource allocation for activities targeting FSW. Since the integration of the activities into the national programs, the capacity to provide prevention services to the FSW population, both in terms of coverage and of the package and the quality of services provided, has significantly declined, even if the strengthening of staff capacity in this domain remains an encouraging achievement. Conclusions The national programs of Benin and Niger do not yet cover sufficiently the most exposed groups (FSW and their partners) who are at the centre of the HIV epidemic. Thus, the study proposes reflection and action to improve coverage of this clientele in order better control of STIs and HIV.
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 | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".