Myths, misunderstandings, and missing information: Experiences of nurse practitioners providing primary care to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nurse practitioners (NPs) are advanced practice nurses who provide holistic care including health promotion and disease prevention to diverse populations across the life span. A current gap in the literature is research that examines NP practice as it relates to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) patients. Individuals who identify as LGBT have health concerns specific to their sexual orientation or gender identity that may not be recognized by healthcare providers, such as NPs, and which may result in poorer health outcomes than for non-LGBT persons. This exploratory qualitative descriptive study was designed to examine in detail the practice experiences of NPs in providing primary health care to LGBT patients. A convenience sample of 22 NPs, supplemented with snowball sampling, was drawn from the registry of licensed NPs in the provinces of New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward Island. Data were collected via semi-structured individual interviews, which were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Some brief measures of quantitative data were also collected for demographic purposes. The qualitative data were analyzed using inductive analysis. Special attention was given to ensuring credibility, dependability, transferability, and confirmability of the data and their interpretation. Key themes that emerged from analysis of the data included: filling in the knowledge gaps; fostering a therapeutic nurse-patient relationship; and sexual and psychosocial health. The research findings also highlighted the gaps that exist in the training and education on LGBT health that NPs received from their educational programs.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".