Medical Journal of The Islamic Republic of Iran (MJIRI)
Iran University of Medical Sciences
Mon, Dec 29, 2025
[Archive]
Volume 39, Issue 1 (1-2025)
Med J Islam Repub Iran 2025 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Rastegari A, Baneshi M R, Zarei N, Joulaei H, Heydari M R. How Visible is the Sex Work in Iran?. Med J Islam Repub Iran 2025; 39 (1) :1172-1176
URL: http://mjiri.iums.ac.ir/article-1-8536-en.html
URL: http://mjiri.iums.ac.ir/article-1-8536-en.html
Modeling in Health Research Center, Institute for Futures Studies in Health, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran & Faculty of Medicine, Center for Longitudinal and Life Course Research, School of Public Health, the University of Queensland, Queensland, Australia , m.baneshi@uq.edu.au
Abstract: (1448 Views)
Background: Network Scale-Up (NSU) is a promising tool in the size estimation of stigmatized behaviors. In NSU, participants from the general population describe the frequency of stigmatized behaviors in their network. To avoid underestimation, due to the invisibility of sensitive behaviors, NSU results should be adjusted by the Visibility Factor (VF). This manuscript aims to compare three VF calculation methods in sex work settings: Game of Contact (GC), Social Respect (SR), and Expert Opinion (EO).
Methods: In the GC method, we selected 20 names and asked 60 FSWs (Female Sex workers) (known as egos) the total number of their acquaintances (known as alters) with any of the 20 names, and of those, how many were aware that the ego was an FSW. In the SR method, we asked 600 participants from the general population about the number of FSWs they knew, and to rank their respect for FSWs on a scale of 1 to 5. Finally, we asked 14 experts in the field of HIV and health policy about the visibility rate of sex work in Iran.
Results: Based on EO, VF was as low as 38%. VF in GC was 67% (95% CI: 54%, 80%) for both male and female alters. SR suggested a VF of 77% (58%, 101%), which was higher in male than female respondents (83% vs. 62%).
Conclusion: Different methods provide different VF estimates. For a fair comparison of studies, a concrete and standard method for VF calculation should be applied.
Methods: In the GC method, we selected 20 names and asked 60 FSWs (Female Sex workers) (known as egos) the total number of their acquaintances (known as alters) with any of the 20 names, and of those, how many were aware that the ego was an FSW. In the SR method, we asked 600 participants from the general population about the number of FSWs they knew, and to rank their respect for FSWs on a scale of 1 to 5. Finally, we asked 14 experts in the field of HIV and health policy about the visibility rate of sex work in Iran.
Results: Based on EO, VF was as low as 38%. VF in GC was 67% (95% CI: 54%, 80%) for both male and female alters. SR suggested a VF of 77% (58%, 101%), which was higher in male than female respondents (83% vs. 62%).
Conclusion: Different methods provide different VF estimates. For a fair comparison of studies, a concrete and standard method for VF calculation should be applied.
Type of Study: Original Research |
Subject:
Preventive Medicine & Community Health
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
