Blind spots in community-based participatory research with sex workers in Singapore: lessons learned and assumptions uncovered in the context of a diverse, hierarchical and stigmatized key population.

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Sexual health Pub Date : 2025-04-01 DOI:10.1071/SH24201
Sook Lin Toh, Vanessa Ho, Raksha Mahtani, Shermaine Koh, Nur Binte Sarah Pancadarma, Audrey Kang, Chen Seong Wong, Brooke S West, Rayner Kay Jin Tan, Pei Hua Lee
{"title":"Blind spots in community-based participatory research with sex workers in Singapore: lessons learned and assumptions uncovered in the context of a diverse, hierarchical and stigmatized key population.","authors":"Sook Lin Toh, Vanessa Ho, Raksha Mahtani, Shermaine Koh, Nur Binte Sarah Pancadarma, Audrey Kang, Chen Seong Wong, Brooke S West, Rayner Kay Jin Tan, Pei Hua Lee","doi":"10.1071/SH24201","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is quickly becoming an ethical standard for research, ensuring that the research processes align with the values of beneficiaries and contributes to broader social justice goals. This paper reflects on a qualitative study on HIV/STI risks in the sex work industry in Singapore that aimed to adopt a CBPR approach. The project was conducted in partnership with a local sex workers' rights group, Project X, and recruited community members to be part of the research team. The data collection phase of the project lasted for approximately 6months, involving five focus group discussions (n = 24) and 55 semi-structured interviews, the latter conducted primarily by three community interviewers. Based on an analysis of our fieldnotes and interviews with community interviewers, we found five key themes - capacity building, cultural knowledge, limited flexibility in project design, intra-community dynamics and differences in research interests. These themes reflected the project's assumptions, adaptations made, limitations and areas of tension. Despite our best efforts to align with CBPR, there were ultimately some pitfalls. This paper reflects on the lessons learned and assumptions uncovered, and advances current understandings of CBPR, particularly in settings where sex work is diverse, hierarchical and remains highly stigmatized or criminalized.</p>","PeriodicalId":22165,"journal":{"name":"Sexual health","volume":"22 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sexual health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1071/SH24201","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is quickly becoming an ethical standard for research, ensuring that the research processes align with the values of beneficiaries and contributes to broader social justice goals. This paper reflects on a qualitative study on HIV/STI risks in the sex work industry in Singapore that aimed to adopt a CBPR approach. The project was conducted in partnership with a local sex workers' rights group, Project X, and recruited community members to be part of the research team. The data collection phase of the project lasted for approximately 6months, involving five focus group discussions (n = 24) and 55 semi-structured interviews, the latter conducted primarily by three community interviewers. Based on an analysis of our fieldnotes and interviews with community interviewers, we found five key themes - capacity building, cultural knowledge, limited flexibility in project design, intra-community dynamics and differences in research interests. These themes reflected the project's assumptions, adaptations made, limitations and areas of tension. Despite our best efforts to align with CBPR, there were ultimately some pitfalls. This paper reflects on the lessons learned and assumptions uncovered, and advances current understandings of CBPR, particularly in settings where sex work is diverse, hierarchical and remains highly stigmatized or criminalized.

新加坡以社区为基础的参与性工作者研究的盲点:在多元化、等级化和污名化的关键人群背景下的经验教训和假设。
基于社区的参与性研究(CBPR)正迅速成为研究的伦理标准,确保研究过程与受益者的价值观保持一致,并有助于实现更广泛的社会正义目标。本文反映了一项关于新加坡性工作行业中艾滋病毒/性传播感染风险的定性研究,该研究旨在采用CBPR方法。该项目是与当地性工作者权利组织“X项目”合作进行的,并招募了社区成员加入研究小组。该项目的数据收集阶段持续了大约6个月,包括5次焦点小组讨论(n = 24)和55次半结构化访谈,后者主要由3名社区访谈者进行。基于对我们的实地记录和对社区采访者的访谈的分析,我们发现了五个关键主题——能力建设、文化知识、项目设计的有限灵活性、社区内部动态和研究兴趣的差异。这些主题反映了项目的假设、改编、限制和紧张的领域。尽管我们尽了最大努力与CBPR保持一致,但最终还是存在一些陷阱。本文反思了经验教训和未发现的假设,并推进了目前对CBPR的理解,特别是在性工作多样化、等级森严、仍然高度污名化或犯罪化的环境中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Sexual health
Sexual health 医学-传染病学
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
12.50%
发文量
121
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Sexual Health publishes original and significant contributions to the fields of sexual health including HIV/AIDS, Sexually transmissible infections, issues of sexuality and relevant areas of reproductive health. This journal is directed towards those working in sexual health as clinicians, public health practitioners, researchers in behavioural, clinical, laboratory, public health or social, sciences. The journal publishes peer reviewed original research, editorials, review articles, topical debates, case reports and critical correspondence. Officially sponsored by: The Australasian Chapter of Sexual Health Medicine of RACP Sexual Health Society of Queensland Sexual Health is the official journal of the International Union against Sexually Transmitted Infections (IUSTI), Asia-Pacific, and the Asia-Oceania Federation of Sexology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信