MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Nomadic sexualities: an in‐depth case study about unsafe sex

2011· article· en· W1512456204 on OpenAlexafffund
Patrick O’Byrne

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing Inquiry · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersInstitute of Gender and HealthCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsHuman sexualityPsychologyUnsafe SexSexual behaviorGender studiesSocial psychologySociologyDevelopmental psychologyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In an era when researchers are identifying increased rates of unsafe sex among gay and bisexual men, it is important that the practice of unsafe sex be adequately explored. While much literature is already dedicated to this topic, only recently have researchers begun to develop in-depth understandings of the personal meanings that people ascribe to unsafe sex. This study continues such explorations by examining (i) why one self-defined gay man engaged in unsafe sex, and (ii) how he defined unsafe sex. The findings suggest that, for this man, his sexuality is nomadic and that what he feels is unsafe sex is the outcome of his nomadic sexuality conflicting with social imperatives for sexual stratification.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.212
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.197
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.234 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNursing InquirySame topicSexuality, Behavior, and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207