Estimation of the Population Size of Street- and Venue-Based Female Sex Workers and Sexually Exploited Minors in Rwanda in 2022: 3-Source Capture-Recapture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: HIV surveillance among key populations is a priority in all epidemic settings. Female sex workers (FSWs) globally as well as in Rwanda are disproportionately affected by the HIV epidemic; hence, the Rwanda HIV and AIDS National Strategic Plan (2018-2024) has adopted regular surveillance of population size estimation (PSE) of FSWs every 2-3 years. OBJECTIVE: We aimed at estimating, for the fourth time, the population size of street- and venue-based FSWs and sexually exploited minors aged ≥15 years in Rwanda. METHODS: In August 2022, the 3-source capture-recapture method was used to estimate the population size of FSWs and sexually exploited minors in Rwanda. The field work took 3 weeks to complete, with each capture occasion lasting for a week. The sample size for each capture was calculated using shinyrecap with inputs drawn from previously conducted estimation exercises. In each capture round, a stratified multistage sampling process was used, with administrative provinces as strata and FSW hotspots as the primary sampling unit. Different unique objects were distributed to FSWs in each capture round; acceptance of the unique object was marked as successful capture. Sampled FSWs for the subsequent capture occasions were asked if they had received the previously distributed unique object in order to determine recaptures. Statistical analysis was performed in R (version 4.0.5), and Bayesian Model Averaging was performed to produce the final PSE with a 95% credibility set (CS). RESULTS: We sampled 1766, 1848, and 1865 FSWs and sexually exploited minors in each capture round. There were 169 recaptures strictly between captures 1 and 2, 210 recaptures exclusively between captures 2 and 3, and 65 recaptures between captures 1 and 3 only. In all 3 captures, 61 FSWs were captured. The median PSE of street- and venue-based FSWs and sexually exploited minors in Rwanda was 37,647 (95% CS 31,873-43,354), corresponding to 1.1% (95% CI 0.9%-1.3%) of the total adult females in the general population. Relative to the adult females in the general population, the western and northern provinces ranked first and second with a higher concentration of FSWs, respectively. The cities of Kigali and eastern province ranked third and fourth, respectively. The southern province was identified as having a low concentration of FSWs. CONCLUSIONS: We provide, for the first time, both the national and provincial level population size estimate of street- and venue-based FSWs in Rwanda. Compared with the previous 2 rounds of FSW PSEs at the national level, we observed differences in the street- and venue-based FSW population size in Rwanda. Our study might not have considered FSWs who do not want anyone to know they are FSWs due to several reasons, leading to a possible underestimation of the true PSE.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".