Sexual Orientation Disclosure in Primary Care Settings by Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex with Men in a Canadian City
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
PURPOSE: Sexual orientation affects individuals' health histories and is fundamental to providers' understanding of patients as a whole. Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GB-MSM) are vulnerable to certain health conditions, including HIV. The aim of this exploratory analysis was to examine factors associated with sexual orientation disclosure and communication with providers about GB-MSM health issues and to discuss implications. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional internet survey of GB-MSM (n = 202) in London-Middlesex, Ontario, Canada; analyses were limited to those with a regular primary care provider (n = 173). Blockwise regression models explored demographic, psychosocial, and healthcare-related factors associated with sexual orientation disclosure and physician-patient communication about GB-MSM-related health. RESULTS: Just over seventy-one percent (71.1%) of participants reported that their primary care provider (PCP) knew their sexual orientation, and 44.5% had talked to them about GB-MSM health. Overt negative comments or being refused care based on sexual orientation occurred infrequently, although 26.6% reported their provider had assumed they were heterosexual. Being married to or living common-law with another man, more frequent experiences of homosexual prejudice, and higher quality assessment of provider's communication skills were associated with the PCP knowing respondents' sexual orientation. Greater internalized homonegativity was associated with not talking to a PCP about GB-MSM-related health issues. More frequent experiences of homosexual prejudice, higher assessment of provider communication, and having prior negative experiences with a PCP were significantly associated with talking to a PCP about GB-MSM health. CONCLUSION: The majority of our sample disclosed their sexual orientation; however, not all patients voluntarily disclose. Medical training and education in Canada, where specific rights protections exist for sexual orientation minority populations, should emphasize awareness of essential patient health information. Training should include information about GB-MSM health and building a foundation on how to speak with GB-MSM patients nonjudgmentally.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle