MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388014136 · doi:10.1177/17455057231206303

Maternal health and maternal health service utilization among female sex workers: A scoping review

2023· review· en· W4388014136 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Brandi E. Moore, Lauren Govaerts, Farzana Kapadia

Bibliographic record

VenueWomen s Health · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSex work and related issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersYork University
KeywordsMaternal healthHealth servicesReproductive healthEnvironmental healthMedicinePsychologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: High proportions of female sex workers (FSWs) become pregnant and have children. Many FSWs are at increased risk of maternal health complications due to factors such as poverty, violence, and healthcare barriers. Despite this, FSWs' maternal health and use of maternal health services (MHS) receive limited attention. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this scoping review are to (1) synthesize existing data on FSWs' maternal health and MHS utilization and (2) assess the state of peer-reviewed literature on FSWs' maternal health in regard to methodological approaches and reported outcomes. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Included articles were peer-reviewed, published in English, and reported empirical data on FSWs for outcomes related to antenatal care, pregnancy, and labor complications, postnatal and delivery care, and/or barriers to MHS. SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: Article searches were conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Global Health, Sociological Abstracts, Sociological Index, PsychInfo, and CINAHL. CHARTING METHODS: Information extracted from eligible articles included publication year, study design, location, sample size, outcome measures, and findings. The "Three Delays" model was used to synthesize findings on barriers to MHS as relevant to phase I, II, or III delays. RESULTS: Eighteen publications met the eligibility criteria. Studies were conducted in 11 countries and primarily reported quantitative data from cross-sectional surveys. The most frequently reported outcome was antenatal care utilization (n = 14), whereas few studies reported findings related to postnatal care and breastfeeding counseling (n = 2). Across publications, there was a substantial range in the proportion of FSWs who reported accessing different types of MHS. CONCLUSION: Literature on FSWs' maternal health is limited and heterogenous. More research is needed that specifically focuses on measuring outcomes related to FSWs' maternal health and examines associated factors. Such work can inform future research directions and public health interventions for FSWs-a population of marginalized women whose maternal health has been overlooked in existing efforts.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.602
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.174
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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