MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3091925473 · doi:10.1186/s12905-020-01086-3

Helping women transition out of sex work: study protocol of a mixed-methods process and outcome evaluation of a sex work exiting program

2020· article· en· W3091925473 on OpenAlexafffund
Martine Shareck, Pearl Buhariwala, Maha Hassan, Patricia O’Campo

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Women s Health · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSex work and related issues
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeHealth and Social Services Centre University Institute of Geriatrics of SherbrookeSt. Michael's HospitalUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersPublic Safety Canada
KeywordsDocumentationFormative assessmentWork (physics)PsychologyMedical educationService providerSex workService (business)Social workInterviewService delivery frameworkProgram evaluationMedicineBusinessEngineeringComputer scienceFamily medicinePolitical scienceMarketingPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: For women who want to, exiting sex work can be challenging. Numerous programs strive to help women wanting to exit sex work and secure alternative sources of income by providing targeted support at key moments during the transition, yet few of those initiatives are rigorously evaluated. In 2017 "Exit Doors Here", a 9-month sex work exiting program based on the critical time intervention (CTI) approach, was developed to provide wrap-around support services (e.g., health, addiction, housing, education, and employment supports) to women wishing to transition towards exiting sex work. METHODS: We present the design of an evaluation study of Exit Doors Here which combines quantitative and qualitative methods to assess participant recruitment and retention into the program, program fidelity, and relationships with service providers (process evaluation), as well as progress made by participants in terms of strengthening their social support networks and moving closer to achieving their housing, pre-employment (i.e., educational, training and volunteering), and income-related goals, as well as their involvement in sex work (outcome evaluation). Each year for 4 years, between 25 and 30 Exit Doors Here clients will be invited to complete an interviewer-administered questionnaire at the beginning and after completing the program, and to share data from their CTI charts and related documentation. Once a year, program staff and peer workers will be interviewed, and service providers will be surveyed. DISCUSSION: Conducting a formative (process) evaluation will allow us to inform program implementation and improve program delivery early on for maximum benefit. The summative (outcome) evaluation will provide much needed evidence on the effectiveness of CTI in supporting a traditionally underserved population to achieve the housing, pre-employment and income-related goals they value, and their progress towards reducing their involvement in, and eventually exiting, sex work.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.083
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.438

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0830.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.004
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0080.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0060.004
Research integrity0.0060.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.006

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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.504
Teacher spread0.376 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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