Barriers to Sexual History Taking in Adolescent Girls With Abdominal Pain in the Pediatric Emergency Department
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Sexually transmitted infections are on the rise, yet a sexual history of adolescent girls presenting with abdominal pain is not routinely sought or recorded. We developed a survey to examine the barriers to taking a sexual history. METHODS: We surveyed 56 medical students and residents rotating through a pediatric emergency department during a 3-month span. Surveys were distributed electronically using Dillman methods, and responses were anonymous. RESULTS: Although respondents generally believed it was appropriate to routinely take a sexual history from girls as young as 12 years old, in cases where a sexual history was omitted, we found that the young age of the patient, the presence of the patient's parents, and an unsubstantiated belief that the patient was chaste are the barriers to taking a sexual history from adolescent girls presenting to the emergency department with abdominal pain. CONCLUSIONS: The barriers to taking a sexual history in adolescent girls are multifaceted. Further training is needed to expose learners' preconceived notions of sexuality as barriers to taking a sexual history, to provide practical methods for overcoming those barriers, and to further instill in learners the importance of doing so.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".