ArticleSexual and reproductive health matters2024
The (mis)use of evidence in contested rights: commentary on the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls' report on "prostitution and violence".
Article in Sexual and reproductive health matters, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Readers of Sexual and Reproductive Health Matter are no strangers to interrogating evidence in all its forms, assessing which claims it can support, and about challenges and uncertainties in international norms in the fields of sexual and reproductive rights and health. Questions of evidence, positionality and the role of testimony are particularly live in the context of sex work and human rights. As an exploration about good and bad practices in research and evidence, in this Commentary we highlight the errors, mistakes and wrongly shaped conclusions arising in the recent report by the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls about prostitution law, sex worker health and rights, and the status of international human rights law on sex work and trafficking. We do this not only to reinforce more accurate information about the status of human rights law, public health evidence and the needs of people of all genders in the sex sector, but also as an opportunity to remind us of the principles around evidence, transparency, and self-determination. We are conscious of the current vulnerability of global rights and health systems. Our Commentary seeks to contextualise our criticisms to this current moment of rights and health systems' fragility and multi-pronged attacks on the emancipatory potential of rights for persons in the sex sector as workers especially as they intersect with racist stereotypes. Practices of deploying evidence matter for rights advocacy: its legitimacy as well as its efficacy depend on good practices.
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.