A Qualitative Systematic Review of Stigma, Violence, Victimization, and Associated Coping Among Transgender People Engaged in Sex Work
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Globally, transgender people engaged in sex work experience disproportionately high risks of victimization. While qualitative studies on the perspectives of transgender people engaged in sex work can shed light on their intersecting experiences, a qualitative synthesis could offer a systematic understanding and inform anti-oppressive practices and policies. This review explores the experience of stigma, violence, victimization, and associated coping strategies among transgender people engaged in sex work. We conducted a literature search in November 2023 on MEDLINE, Social Work Abstracts, and CINAHL PLUS from EBSCOhost, APA PsycInfo, ASSIA, and Sociological Abstracts from ProQuest and SCOPUS (PROSPERO ID: CRD42023478844). From 1,085 studies retrieved, 64 were included in this review. Thematic synthesis identified seven themes: (a) individual struggle, (b) interpersonal violence, (c) community transphobia and exclusion, (d) systemic oppression, (e) individual coping strategies, (f) community resources, and (g) organizational support as coping resources. This review contributes to the discussion around the health vulnerabilities of transgender people engaged in sex work that inherently result from intersecting victimization in a larger global context, including trafficking, urban planning, migration, and COVID-19. Identification of the coping strategies of transgender people engaged in sex work also highlights their resilience and sites of empowerment. Policymakers and professionals should be mindful of the intersectional identities of transgender people engaged in sex work and initiate peer- and community-led interventions to support them in building intersectional solidarity and resisting victimization.
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 | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".