Integrating Psychological Theory Into the Design of an Online Intervention for Sexual Health: The Sexunzipped Website
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Internet can provide a confidential and convenient medium for sexual health promotion for young people. OBJECTIVE: This paper describes the development of an interactive, theory-based website (Sexunzipped) aimed at increasing safe sexual behavior of young people, as well as an outline of the evaluation protocol. METHODS: The website focuses on safer sex, relationships, and sexual pleasure. An overview of the site is provided, including a description of the theoretical constructs which form the basis of the site development. An integrated behavioral model was chosen as the guiding theory for the Sexunzipped intervention. A randomized trial design will be used to evaluate the site quantitatively. RESULTS: The content of the site is described in detail with examples of the main content types: information pages, quizzes, and decision-making activities. We describe the protocol for quantitative evaluation of the website using a randomized trial design and discuss the principal challenges involved in developing the site, including the challenge of balancing the requirements of theory with young people's views on website content and design. CONCLUSIONS: Considerations for future interventions are discussed. Developing an online behavior-change intervention is costly and time consuming. Given the large public health potential, the cost involved in developing online interventions, and the need for attractive design, future interventions may benefit from collaborating with established sites that already have a user base, a brand, and a strong Internet presence. It is vital to involve users in decisions about intervention content, design, and features, paying attention to aspects that will attract and retain users' interest. A central challenge in developing effective Internet-based interventions for young people is to find effective ways to operationalize theory in ways that address the views and perspectives of young people.
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 | 0.013 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".