(004) “YOU NEVER KNOW WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE, UNTIL YOU LOOK AT IT”: PATIENT DEPICTIONS OF FEMALE GENITAL ANATOMY
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Introduction In recent years, there has been a growing interest in how patients employ health literacy, including basic anatomy knowledge, to navigate the health care system and communicate effectively with providers. Some empirical data suggests that female genital anatomy may often present a specific obstacle. While previous studies have called attention to this knowledge gap, there is little understanding of why this topic is particularly challenging for patients. Further, there has been no investigation of how patients visually understand and depict vulvar anatomy. Objective To inform future health literacy improvement efforts, we explored patient conceptualizations of the vulva through a drawing-based study. Methods Twenty obstetrics and gynecology patients at a tertiary care centre in Canada were asked to draw female external genital anatomy as part of a semi-structured interview. Participants ranged in age from 19 to 72 years old and had sought medical care for a variety of medical reasons, including pregnancy-related complications, childbirth, gynecologic cancer, and abnormal uterine bleeding. Each participant described their drawing to encourage collaborative meaning-making and give voice to what the drawing was intended to convey. The descriptions were audio-recorded and transcribed. Thematic analysis of both the descriptions and drawings was performed comparatively and iteratively, informed by principles of constructivist grounded theory and critical visual methodology. Results Participants were universally uncomfortable with the task of creating a drawing, regardless of age, health status, or previous employment. However, the investigation highlighted a relationship between previous exposure to images of female genital anatomy and ability to confidently capture vulvar landmarks through drawing. When uncertain, participants refused to abandon their task, and instead employed multiple artistic strategies in an attempt to produce a finished piece. Conclusions This study contributes to the body of evidence on genital self-image and the potential benefits of patient education to improve exposure to vulvar anatomy. However, we also provide new insight into how patients see female genital anatomy, with the opportunity to create specific educational interventions that address common stumbling blocks. Disclosure No.
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
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 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».