Factors shaping the provision of sexual health education for adults with acute coronary syndrome: A scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Each year, 63,000 Canadians are diagnosed with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and 73 % survive. Sexual health education for ACS survivors is recommended but is not routinely provided. A scoping review was performed to inform health care providers about factors shaping sexual health education for ACS survivors. METHODS: Three databases were searched, 208 studies were screened, and 24 were included in this scoping review. Significant points from the selected studies were charted and synthesized. RESULTS: This review confirmed absent to limited provision of sexual health education to individuals with ACS. Key factors influencing lack of provision of sexual health were categorized according to macro, meso, and micro levels. At the macro level, societal and cultural factors were noted. The meso level included healthcare environment and limited healthcare provider knowledge. At the micro level, healthcare professional-healthcare consumer relationships and role clarity were noted. CONCLUSION: A sex positive approach may facilitate provision of sexual health education. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: This scoping review points to the need to use a sex positive lens to identify and remove barriers to facilitate the provision of sexual health education. Providing this education may result in reduced fear, depression, and anxiety in ACS survivors.
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 | 0.008 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".