“This Research Is Cool”: Engaging Youth Experiencing Homelessness in Research on Reproductive and Sexual Health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Youth experiencing homelessness face myriad barriers and inequities regarding their reproductive and sexual health and rights. Moreover, homeless youth are often characterized as "disaffiliated" and depicted as difficult to engage in research. This study qualitatively explored homeless youths' attitudes, beliefs, and needs regarding reproductive and sexual health, and sought their perspectives on being involved in research on such topics, which are often thought of as "taboo" or sensitive. Youth were enthusiastic about openly discussing such issues, which they deemed as highly relevant to their daily lives. Youth identified that how they were engaged in such research, and having opportunities for longer-term contributions to such efforts, were both important and exciting to them. Future social work and public health research efforts should seek to further disrupt narratives of homeless youth as "disaffiliated" and difficult to engage, and in doing so, develop more creative, participatory, and youth-led opportunities for including this group in reproductive and sexual health research.
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 | 0.038 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.007 |
| 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".