Supporting Women Exit Sex Work: A Contribution Analysis of the Exit Doors Here Integrated Care Program in Toronto, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Exiting sex work is a complex process which can be facilitated by integrated action on health and its social determinants such as housing and employment. Few programs offer such coordinated support, and even fewer have been evaluated. We assessed if and how Exit Doors Here, a program anchored in the Critical Time Intervention (CTI) model, facilitated women's progress towards their goals, and exit from sex work. Description: We performed a contribution analysis by combining pre-post questionnaire and administrative data from 55 women enrolled in the program (2018-2021), yearly interviews with program staff and peer mentors, and literature reviews to assess program outcomes and mechanisms as described in the theory of change. Discussion: We found evidence that the program contributed to participants progressing on their pre-employment, housing, income, and sex work exiting goals. We identified four "key ingredients" facilitating success: trust building, collaborative goal setting, connecting with community supports and weekly drop-in sessions. Conclusion: This rigorous theory-based evaluation provides much needed evidence on the process and effectiveness of an integrated sex work exiting program. Findings regarding key program ingredients can inform other interventions serving similarly marginalized populations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".