A Health Education Website Developed to Meet Young People’s Information Needs About Web-Based Pornography and Sharing of Sexually Explicit Imagery (SCOPE): Usability Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although we know that many young people watch online pornography and engage in sexting, there is limited literature examining their needs in relation to information on these highly sensitive and complex issues. Online resources exist; however, we can find no evidence of any of them having been formally tested for usability within the target population. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to test the usability of a resource about online pornography and sexting among young people. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with 17 participants aged 15 to 29 years. RESULTS: We found that the SCOPE resource was perceived as trustworthy and credible because of its evidence-based content, nonjudgmental tone, and balanced perspectives. Multimedia and video content enhanced the layout and usability of the resource; however, content relevance could be improved by targeting age and developmental stages. Participants identified resource sections such as Real Stories from young people as relevant and engaging. However, they raised issues with the translation of formative research findings relating to these stories into their final presentation. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that young people prefer online resources about complex issues, such as online pornography and sexting, if they are balanced in content and tone. Most importantly, in the context of responding to complex and sensitive issues such as these, co-design methods can ensure that young people are central to the development of resources and avoid gaps in translating research into practice. In the context of limited literature focusing on the usability of online resources about these topics, this paper provides important insights for public health practitioners working in this emerging space.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".