Contextualising sexual health practices among lesbian and bisexual women in Jamaica: a multi-methods study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Limited research has examined lesbian and bisexual women's sexual health practices in the Caribbean, where lesbian and bisexual women experience sexual stigma that may reduce sexual healthcare utilisation. We conducted a sequential multi-method research study, including semi-structured individual interviews (n = 20) and a focus group (n = 5) followed by a cross-sectional survey (n = 205) with lesbian and bisexual women in Kingston, Montego Bay, and Ocho Rios, Jamaica. Binary logistic analyses and ordinal logistic regression were conducted to estimate the odds ratios for social-ecological factors associated with lifetime STI testing, sex work involvement, and the last time of STI testing. Over half of participants reported a lifetime STI test and of these, 6.1% reported an STI diagnosis. One-fifth of the sample reported ever selling sex. Directed content analysis of women's narratives highlighted that stigma and discrimination from healthcare providers, in combination with low perceived STI risk, limited STI testing access and safer sex practices. Participants described how safer sex self-efficacy increased their safer sex practices. Quantitative results revealed that a longer time since last STI test was positively associated with depression, sexual stigma, and forced sex, and negatively associated with residential location, perceived STI risk, safer sex self-efficacy, and LGBT connectedness. Selling sex was associated with perceived STI risk, relationship status, sexual stigma, food insecurity, and forced sex. Sexual health practices among lesbian and bisexual women in Jamaica are associated with intrapersonal, interpersonal, and structural factors, underscoring the urgent need for multi-level interventions to improve sexual health and advance sexual rights among lesbian and bisexual women in Jamaica.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".