Table 3.
Crude and adjusted analysis for mistreatment, forced sex and social exclusion as associated with transgender women sex workers compared to cisgender men who had not received money for sex and cisgender male sex workers.
| Discriminated due to sexual identitya |
Rejected by family due to sexual identity |
|||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n (%) | PR | 95% CI | aPRb | 95% CI | n (%) | PR | 95% CI | aPRb | 95% CI | |
| Transgender sex worker | 89 (73.0) | 2.9 | 2.4, 3.4 | 2.6 | 2.2, 3.2 | 55 (45.1) | 1.3 | 1.0, 1.6 | 1.2 | 1.0, 1.6 |
| Male sex workerc | 110 (38.7) | 1.5 | 1.3, 1.9 | 1.3 | 1.1, 1.6 | 71 (25.2) | 0.7 | 0.6, 0.9 | 0.7 | 0.5, 0.9 |
| Male non-sex workerc | 165 (25.3) | 1 (ref) | 1 (ref) | 225 (34.8) | 1 (ref) | 1 (ref) | ||||
| Transgender sex worker | 89 (73.0) | 1.9 | 1.6, 2.3 | 2.0 | 1.7, 2.4 | 55 (45.1) | 1.8 | 1.4, 2.4 | 1.8 | 1.3, 2.3 |
| Male sex workerc | 110 (38.7) | 1 (ref) | 1 (ref) | 71 (25.2) | 1 (ref) | 1 (ref) | ||||
| Physically abuseda | Forced to have sexa | |||||||||
| Transgender sex worker | 35 (28.7) | 9.3 | 5.6, 15.6 | 7.5 | 4.4, 12.7 | 15 (13.5) | 6.5 | 3.0, 14.2 | 7.5 | 3.1, 18.2 |
| Male sex workerc | 25 (8.8) | 2.9 | 1.6, 5.1 | 1.8 | 1.0, 3.1 | 28 (12.5) | 6.0 | 3.0, 12.2 | 6.1 | 2.7, 14.2 |
| Male non-sex workerc | 20 (3.1) | 1 (ref) | 1 (ref) | 10 (2.1) | 1 (ref) | 1 (ref) | ||||
| Transgender sex worker | 35 (28.7) | 3.3 | 2.0, 5.2 | 4.3 | 2.7, 6.9 | 15 (13.5) | 1.1 | 0.6, 1.9 | 1.2 | 0.7, 2.3 |
| Male sex workerc | 25 (8.8) | 1 (ref) | 1 (ref) | 28 (12.5) | 1 (ref) | 1 (ref) | ||||
PR Prevalence ratio; aPR adjusted prevalence ratio; CI confidence intervals.
a
In the past 12 months.
b
Adjusted for age, education and monthly income.
c
All cisgender men included in the study reported sex with a transgender woman or a man in the past 12 months.