Sex workers' utilisation of health services in a decriminalised environment.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In 2003 the Prostitution Reform Act (PRA) was passed in New Zealand which decriminalised all activities associated with sex work. AIM: To explore sex workers' utilisation of health services in New Zealand following decriminalisation of sex work and disclosure of their occupation to health professionals. METHOD: A cross-sectional survey was carried out with 772 sex workers and in-depth interviews were carried out with 58 sex workers in New Zealand. RESULTS: Most sex workers have regular sexual health check-ups and most access their general practitioner (GP) for both general health needs (91.8%) and sexual health needs (41.3%). A quarter of the participants accessed a local sexual health centre for their sexual health needs and just over 15% accessed New Zealand Prostitutes' Collective's (NZPC's) Sexual Health Clinic. Little change was found in disclosure of occupation to health professionals following decriminalisation. Sex workers remain concerned about disclosing their occupation because of perceived stigma attached to their occupation. CONCLUSION: Most sex workers have regular sexual health check-ups and most access their GP for this service. However, because of on-going perceptions of stigmatisation many do not report their occupation to their GP which may mean that check-ups may not be comprehensive. For this reason, sexual health check-ups performed at NZPC may be preferable to check-ups elsewhere because disclosure of occupation is not an issue.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".