Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32737659›Full record

ArticleArchives of sexual behavior2021

Early Assessment of Integrated Knowledge Translation Efforts to Mobilize Sex Workers in Their Communities.

Cecilia Benoit, Róisín Unsworth

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of sexual behavior, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Cecilia BenoitDepartment of Sociology, Canadian Institute for Substance Use Research, University of Victoria, 2300 McKenzie Ave., Victoria, BC, V8N 5M8, Canada. cbenoit@uvic.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1000-6049
Róisín UnsworthDepartment of Sociology, Canadian Institute for Substance Use Research, University of Victoria, 2300 McKenzie Ave., Victoria, BC, V8N 5M8, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Researchers have recently increased their efforts to find more effective strategies to reduce the gap between the production of academic knowledge and its uptake in policy and practice. We focus attention on sex workers in Canada who have limited access to societal resources and are hampered by punitive laws prohibiting their work. The initial aim of our study was to work with sex worker organizations and allied agencies to develop a training program for sex workers to help them understand Canada's most recent criminal justice approach to adult sex commerce. What has emerged from our integrated knowledge translation process during the first year of the study's operation has been a change to a broader focus on mobilizing sex workers around their occupational and social rights. In this paper, we first give an overview of recent changes in Canada's prostitution laws and then report qualitative findings from interviews with members of our partner organizations. Interviewees appreciated the change in research direction and the emergent collaborative process among themselves and the authors, but also noted challenges regarding shifting research timelines, balancing power between themselves and the academic researchers, and reaching consensus on research plans among community partners themselves. We discuss the findings in relation to successful knowledge translation strategies that aim to ensure the research questions we ask, and the empirical processes we engage in, are advantageous to those we aim to benefit.

Indexed as

HumansResidence CharacteristicsSex WorkersTranslational Research, BiomedicalCollaborative governanceIntegrated knowledge translationMobilizationParticipatory researchSex workers

Identifiers

PMID32737659
PMCPMC7394475

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.