| Title |
An integrated structural intervention to reduce vulnerability to HIV and sexually transmitted infections among female sex workers in Karnataka state, south India
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, October 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2458-11-755 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Vandana Gurnani, Tara S Beattie, Parinita Bhattacharjee, CFAR Team, HL Mohan, Srinath Maddur, Reynold Washington, Shajy Isac, BM Ramesh, Stephen Moses, James F Blanchard |
| Abstract |
Structural factors are known to affect individual risk and vulnerability to HIV. In the context of an HIV prevention programme for over 60,000 female sex workers (FSWs) in south India, we developed structural interventions involving policy makers, secondary stakeholders (police, government officials, lawyers, media) and primary stakeholders (FSWs themselves). The purpose of the interventions was to address context-specific factors (social inequity, violence and harassment, and stigma and discrimination) contributing to HIV vulnerability. We advocated with government authorities for HIV/AIDS as an economic, social and developmental issue, and solicited political leadership to embed HIV/AIDS issues throughout governmental programmes. We mobilised FSWs and appraised them of their legal rights, and worked with FSWs and people with HIV/AIDS to implement sensitization and awareness training for more than 175 government officials, 13,500 police and 950 journalists. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 83% |
| Unknown | 1 | 17% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 223 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 220 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 40 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 38 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 25 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 23 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 4% |
| Other | 36 | 16% |
| Unknown | 52 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 52 | 23% |
| Social Sciences | 45 | 20% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 22 | 10% |
| Psychology | 17 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 27 | 12% |
| Unknown | 56 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 October 2011.
All research outputs
#7,166,280
of 22,653,392 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#7,520
of 14,735 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,607
of 132,607 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#102
of 200 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,653,392 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,735 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 132,607 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 200 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.