Home-based sex communication, school coverage of sex, and problems in sexual functioning among adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Young people experience problems in sexual functioning at high rates. Sexual health education (SHE) has been found to reduce risk for negative outcomes, yet research has not addressed how SHE is related to problems in sexual functioning among adolescents. The current study assessed how perceived quality of sexual education at home and quality of coverage of sexual health topics in school are related to sexual functioning among adolescents. Adolescents (N = 411, 16–21 years) completed measures of sexual functioning and related distress, sexual self-esteem, and school SHE and home-based sex communication. Lower sexual-self-esteem was related to higher odds of reporting a sexual problem as well as more distress about these problems. After controlling for sexual self-esteem, higher perceived quality of home-based communication with parents about sex was associated with lower odds of having one or more sexual problems (OR = .80), but higher odds of having distressing sexual problems (OR = 1.51) for male adolescents only. Quality of coverage of sex topics in SHE was unrelated. These findings suggest that home-based sex communication for male adolescents may be important for experiencing problems overall, but also may contribute to heightened distress should a problem occur. Results are discussed in terms of differential socialization by parents in communicating with sons and daughters about sex.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".