A community-based qualitative study on the experience and understandings of intimate partner violence and HIV vulnerability from the perspectives of female sex workers and male intimate partners in North Karnataka state, India
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Research has increasingly documented the important role that violence by clients and the police play in exacerbating HIV vulnerability for women in sex work. However few studies have examined violence in the intimate relationships of women in sex work, or drawn on community partnerships to explore the social dynamics involved. A community-based participatory research study was undertaken by community and academic partners leading intimate partner violence (IPV) and HIV prevention programs in Bagalkot district, Karnataka state, India. The purpose was to explore the experience and understandings of intimate partner violence and HIV/AIDS among women in sex work and their intimate partners in Bagalkot that would inform both theory and practice. METHODS: A community-based, interpretive qualitative methodology was used. Data was collected between July and October 2014 through in-depth interviews with 38 participants, including 10 couples, 13 individual female sex workers, and 5 individual male intimate partners. Purposive sampling was done to maximize variation on socio-demographic characteristics. Thematic content analysis was conducted through coding and categorization for each interview question in NVivo 10.0, followed by collaborative analysis to answer the research questions. RESULTS: The results showed that an array of interrelated, multi-level factors underlay the widespread acceptance and perpetuation of violence and lack of condom use in participants' intimate relationships. These included individual expectations that justified violence and reflected societal gender norms, compounded by stigma, legal and economic constraints relating to sex work. The results demonstrate that structural vulnerability to IPV and HIV must be addressed not only on the individual and relationship levels to resolve relevant triggers of violence and lack of condom use, but also the societal-level to address gender norms and socio-economic constraints among women in sex work and their partners. CONCLUSION: The study contributes to a better understanding on the interplay of individual agency and structural forces at a time when researchers and program planners are increasingly pondering how best to address complex and intersecting social and health issues. Ongoing research should assess the generalizability of the results and the effectiveness of structural interventions aiming to reduce IPV and HIV vulnerability in other contexts.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".