Measuring a hidden population: A novel technique to estimate the population size of women with sexual violence-related pregnancies in South Kivu Province, Democratic Republic of Congo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Successive sampling (SS)-population size estimation (PSE) is a technique used to estimate the sizes of hidden populations using data collected in respondent-driven sampling (RDS) surveys. We assess past estimations and use new data from an RDS survey to calculate a new PSE. In 2012, 852 adult women in South Kivu Province, Democratic Republic of Congo, who self-identified as survivors of sexual violence, resulting in a pregnancy, since the start of the war (in 1996) were sampled using RDS. We used imputed visibility, enrollment order, and prior estimates for PSE using SS-PSE in RDS Analyst. Prior estimates varied between Congolese local experts and researchers. We calculated the PSE of women with a sexual violence-related pregnancy in South Kivu using researchers' priors to be approximately 17,400. SS-PSE is an effective method for estimating the population sizes of hidden populations, useful for providing evidence for services and resource allocation. SS-PSE is beneficial because population sizes can be calculated after conducting the survey and do not rely on separate studies or additional data (as in network scale-up, multiplier, and capture-recapture methods).
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 | 0.006 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".