Sexual health among young bisexual women: a qualitative, community-based study
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Young bisexual women experience health disparities related to sexual health, yet there is comparatively little research that addresses which specific factors drive these disparities. The current study investigates young bisexual women’s perspective of their sexual health in order to address this gap. We conducted a community-based qualitative study in Canada, which included four two-hour focus group sessions with 35 bisexual women (broadly defined as bisexual and other nonmonosexual people who self-identify as women, cisgender and transgender inclusive). Focus group sessions were transcribed verbatim and analysed from a grounded theory approach. Young bisexual women perceive various forms of stigma, most notably binegativity and monosexism, as negatively impacting their sexual health. This stigma creates barriers at the institutional and interpersonal level to maintaining positive sexual health. Young bisexual women relate substantial negative health consequences to stigma, including a dearth of applicable health resources and risk of sexual violence. Participants suggest a number of ways in which their health could be supported.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it