Information behavior and HIV/AIDS/STI awareness among Bangladeshi female sex workers: Do informational programs help?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using de Certeau's concepts of “tactics” and “strategies,” this study explores the everyday information seeking behavior of female sex workers (FSWs) in Bangladesh. This study also examined the effectiveness of informational programs on HIV/AIDS and STI in empowering FSWs to negotiate condom use during sex. A mixed method research design was employed in this study, which included face-to-face surveys with 116 female sex workers (FSWs) and four focus group discussions (FGDs) with 23 street based FSWs. The study finds that Bangladeshi female sex workers use “tactics” in meeting their information needs. They reported rarely using formal information sources such as government agencies and indicated sometimes being harassed by law enforcement agencies because of their professional status, creating a distance between formal information agencies and their everyday life information seeking. Furthermore, FSWs reported having significant unmet information needs. The findings regarding the effectiveness of HIV/AIDS and STI informational programs indicated that simply providing ‘information’ may not be sufficient to empower FSWs to negotiate safer sexual practices with their clients.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".