MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sexual activity and risk-taking in later life

2001· article· en· W2169934023 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
C. Merryn Gott

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth & Social Care in the Community · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)MedicineFamily medicineGenitourinary medicineReproductive healthPopulationGerontologyDemographyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The primary study objective was to identify the prevalence of sexual activity and sexual risk-taking behaviour among a sample of older community-based adults. Secondary objectives included gathering data about past experiences of consultations regarding sexual health issues with general practitioners (GPs) and at genitourinary medicine (GUM) clinics, and exploring participants' STI and HIV/AIDS-related information needs. Individuals over the age of 50 were identified from four electoral wards within Sheffield, UK by means of a postal screen based on the electoral register. Respondents self completed a short postal questionnaire. Three hundred and nineteen individuals aged over 50 years selected at random from the general population responded. Approximately 80% of respondents were currently sexually active and 7% engaged in behaviours that may place them at risk of contracting a sexually transmitted infection (STI). Risk takers were typically male, aged between 50 and 60 years and married. Being male was also related to reporting current or past sexual health concerns. In total, of 75 respondents reporting such concerns, two thirds had discussed these concerns with their GP or attended a GUM clinic. Levels of satisfaction with such consultations were generally high, but declined with increasing age. Overall, most participants felt they had not received very much information about STIs and HIV, and about one quarter reported that they would like to receive more information on these topics. These data have implications for all health and social care professionals who work with older people and indicate a potential need for education to help professionals meet the sexual health needs of their older patients/clients. Further implications for sexual health promotion and the need for additional research in this field are also discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.231
GPT teacher head0.495
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations128
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth & Social Care in the CommunitySame topicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive HealthFrench-language works237,207