ArticlePloS one2022
Does individual advocacy work?: A research and evaluation protocol for a youth anti-sex trafficking program.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Defining advocacy in public health: a scoping review to inform policy, training, and equity-oriented action.International journal for equity in health · 2026Article
- Coping self-efficacy and social support as predictors of adolescent sex trafficking exit: Results of a secondary analysis.PloS one · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThousands of youth are sexually trafficked each year worldwide. Increased public attention to the commercial sexual exploitation (CSE) of children has resulted in the rapid deployment of hybrid community public health and social service programs for these vulnerable youth. Research on the effectiveness of these advocacy programs is lacking, particularly whether they decrease psychosocial distress and increase readiness to leave CSE. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Cisgender girls under age 18 at the time of CSE, and who were identified as at-risk for sex trafficking revictimization, were included in an evaluation of an anti-trafficking advocacy program in the North Texas region of the United States. The program includes crisis response, case management, referral, and mentoring services in collaboration with multi-disciplinary team (MDT) responses to identified youth sex trafficking. Case management notes, needs assessments and individualized treatment plans were collected at intake and every 30 days until study conclusion. Standardized surveys, including the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS), the Coping Self-Efficacy Scale, and the University of Rhode Island Change Assessment (URICA) were collected at intake and every 180 days until the study concluded. Analyses included descriptive statistics, paired t-tests, chi-square, multivariate linear and logistic regressions, Poisson regressions, and latent profile analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the Texas Christian University's Institutional Review Board (IRB). Results of this study will be presented to the scientific community at conferences and in peer-reviewed journals and non-scholarly outlets such as public health and social service conferences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.