MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2541328553 · doi:10.1089/lgbt.2016.0005

Minority Stress and Safer Sex Practices Among Sexual Minority Women in Toronto, Canada: Results from a Cross-Sectional Internet-Based Survey

2016· article· en· W2541328553 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueLGBT Health · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoWomen's College Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsLesbianSocial supportSexual minorityPsychologyCross-sectional studyPsychological interventionHeterosexualityClinical psychologyReproductive healthStigma (botany)HomosexualitySocial psychologyMedicineSexual orientationPopulationPsychiatryEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Sexual stigma is a chronic stressor that enhances vulnerability to mental health disparities among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer people. Sexual stigma has also been associated with reduced uptake of safer sex practices, such as condom use, among gay and bisexual men. Scant research has examined the relationship between sexual stigma and safer sex practices among sexual minority women (SMW), including lesbian, bisexual, and queer women. METHODS: We explored associations between sexual stigma and safer sex practices among SMW. We also tested the interaction between sexual stigma, social support, and resilient coping in this relationship. A cross-sectional internet-based survey was administered to SMW in Toronto, Canada. RESULTS: Among 388 participants with complete measurement data, simple linear regression indicated both perceived and enacted sexual stigma were positively associated with uptake of safer sex practices. In multivariable analyses, significant interactions were found between perceived sexual stigma and resilient coping, and between enacted sexual stigma and social support. At low levels of resilient coping, higher levels of perceived sexual stigma were associated with fewer safer sex practices, while at high levels of resilient coping the relationship was reversed. At low levels of social support, higher levels of enacted sexual stigma were associated with fewer safer sex practices, while at high levels of social support the relationship was reversed. CONCLUSIONS: These findings document complex relationships between sexual stigma dimensions, coping, social support, and safer sex practices. Understanding the role these variables play in uptake of safer sex practices can inform sexual health interventions tailored for SMW.

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.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.674

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.288 · 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