Percepción de las trabajadoras sexuales de la calidad de atención que se brinda : Cerets de la Disa V Lima Ciudad 2003
Bibliographic record
Abstract
--- OBJECTIVES: To determine the perception of the sexual workers of the quality of attention and their aspects, in the CERETS DISA V Lima. \nMATERIAL AND METHODS: Study that in its first part is of Quantitative, Descriptive and Traverse Type, in 346 sexual workers (TS) that go to their controls in the CERETS (Patruco and Surquillo). It was analyzed through a questionnaire the perceptions of the aspects of the technical and interpersonal of the quality of attention. The data were processed in percentage form and for the associations was used the jhi quarter (x2). \nThe second part of the study is of Qualitative Type, in 12 TS that go to the CERETS. The perception of the quality of attention and their aspects was analyzed through an interview to depth; the interviews were analyzed by the investigator. \nRESULTS: The perception of the sexual workers about the quality of attention of these centers is adapted in 87%. The aspects of the quality of attention perceived as appropriate are: the accessibility in 84%, the trust to the doctor, paying them attention during the consultation 93% respectively, and the human treatment offered 92%, and the information of their diagnoses of health 92%, while the prolonged time of wait was perceived as inadequate in 83%. The results of the qualitative study evidenced that one of the main reasons for which the sexual workers go to the CERETS is for their controls and for the good attention that offer. The aspects that they mentioned about the quality of attention perceived as appropriate are: the trust to the doctor, the human treatment, being listened, while the aspects perceived as of bad quality are mainly the prolonged time of wait. \nCONCLUSION: \nThe sexual workers perceive an appropriate quality of attention, although exists certain processes of the attention that are inappropriate, as the prolonged time of wait. \nFor these women the most important in the offered attention is that the information of the medical diagnosis that is offered be positive and if it is the opposite that be solved their problems of health like be, since their perception about the quality of attention rotates around these mentioned facts.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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".