MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2910411795 · doi:10.2196/11829

Developing a Sexual Health Promotion Intervention With Young Men in Prisons: A Rights-Based Participatory Approach

2019· article· en· W2910411795 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Michelle Templeton, Carmel Kelly, Maria Lohan

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilBurdett Trust for Nursing
KeywordsCitizen journalismIntervention (counseling)Health promotionParticipatory action researchReproductive healthPromotion (chess)Sexual and reproductive health and rightsCommunity-based participatory researchPsychologyMedicineMedical educationPolitical scienceNursingSociologyPublic healthReproductive rightsPopulationEnvironmental healthPsychiatryPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The sexual health of young men in prisons is often among the poorest in any given country. They may have developed sexual behaviors that, from a public health perspective, are considered problematic and burdensome. These include poorer use of condoms and engaging in more frequent casual sex, resulting in higher rates of sexually transmitted infections, including HIV and viral hepatitis. Thus, young incarcerated men are a highly marginalized and socially excluded high-risk group, in greater need of sexual health education and services. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to create an innovative sexual health promotion intervention, made for and with young men in prisons, to encourage them to avail of regular sexual health checkups. This included developing a Web-based animated-style sexual health promotion intervention (1.42 min) coupled with upskilling the prison nurses to offer a partnership approach to prison health care. This paper focuses on the development of the intervention and the importance of the underpinning rights-based (RB) participatory intervention design. METHODS: We employed an RB participatory approach and recruited 14 participants who attended 3 coproduction workshops held within a prison site in Northern Ireland, United Kingdom. A bespoke 3-day training for nurses beforehand, ensured they gained a deeper understanding of the determinants of poor sexual health. The coproduction team comprised young men, prison nurses, nurse sexual health consultant, media company representatives, and facilitator. Workshops focused on content, design, tone and medium of communication for a Web-based intervention that would be appealing and engaging for young incarcerated men. RESULTS: A 1.42-min animation Dick loves Doot was created to promote a positive attitude toward sexual health checkups. The RB approach enabled the young men to participate, have their voices heard and see their stories reflected through the animation. The nurses' capacities to protect, fulfill, and respect the young men's rights to appropriate sexual health services and education was also enhanced. Evaluations confirmed that we successfully provided accurate sexual health information in a way that was engaging and accessible and that encouraged the young men to avail of the new prison sexual health services that were set up in the prison and now provided by nurses. CONCLUSIONS: The RB participatory approach to health advanced in this study provided a means to (1) gain invaluable insider knowledge to understand the impact of structural determinants on health and health inequalities and strategies by which to target young incarcerated men (2) create inclusive opportunities for developing bespoke targeted interventions, and (3) galvanize collaborative partnerships to disrupt the structures and processes that lead to and encourage health inequities. To reduce future risk, effective treatment, coupled with coproduced interventions that transmit relevant health messages in a relevant and meaningful way, is key to success.

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)0.031
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.166

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0310.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.384
GPT teacher head0.571
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations15
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicCriminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisFrench-language works237,207