A cross-sectional study of community perceptions of stigmatization amongst women affected by UN-peacekeeper perpetrated sexual exploitation and abuse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA) by UN peacekeepers perpetrated against local women and girls is a concern in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). While stigma associated with sexual and gender-based violence is well documented more broadly, little is known about stigma associated with peacekeeper-perpetrated SEA. METHODS: The aim of this study was to examine how the degree of exposure to SEA affects community perceptions of a woman or girl's (1) social status (public stigma) and (2) institutional support in her community (structural stigma). Two poisson regression models with robust variance estimation were constructed utilizing community survey data of SEA experiences from eastern DRC (n = 2867) to quantify these associations. Relevant demographic variables were assessed for confounding and effect modification. RESULTS: The prevalence of public and structural stigma were 62.9 and 19.3% respectively across the sample. A positive relationship was demonstrated between level of exposure of SEA and diminished social status in which women and girls experiencing moderate levels of SEA were at the greatest risk of public stigmatization after adjusting for confounding (RR: 1.94; CI: 1.66-2.26). Similarly, a positive relationship between exposure to SEA and inadequate institutional support was shown for female narrators wherein women and girls experiencing a high degree of SEA were 6.53 times as likely to receive inadequate support (RR: 6.53; CI: 3.63, 11.73). This contrasted with male narrated stories for whom there was no significant association between the SEA exposure level and institutional support. CONCLUSIONS: Women/girls with high exposure levels to UN peacekeeper-perpetrated SEA are at the highest risk of public and structural stigmatization, which should be more routinely considered when conceptualizing the consequences of SEA in peacekeeping contexts. The frequent occurrence of both public and structural stigma, coupled with the varying perceptions by sex, demonstrates the need for a multi-faceted approach for stigma reduction.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".