MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3153674068 · doi:10.1080/15546128.2021.1902891

Introducing Sexual and Gender Minority Health: Medical Students Develop and Evaluate an LGBT+ Infographic

2021· article· en· W3153674068 on OpenAlexafffund
Laurence Biro, Herman Tang, Groonie Tang, Kaiwen Song, Joyce Nyhof‐Young

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Sexuality Education · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsCentre for Advancing Health OutcomesUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Toronto
FundersDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto
KeywordsInfographicThematic analysisSexual orientationReproductive healthHealth communicationFocus groupSexual identityQualitative researchContent analysisMedical educationPsychologyPedagogyMedicineSociologyHuman sexualityComputer scienceSocial psychologyPopulationGender studiesSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Teaching sexual and gender minority (SGM) health in undergraduate medical education has become a priority. We have authored and evaluated an infographic to introduce first-year students to SGM health, identity, and clinical communication skills. A realist and constructivist qualitative design employed audio-recorded and transcribed student focus groups. Using generic content analysis, transcripts were coded and a thematic framework created. Three themes were identified: content (concepts, chunking topics, future clinical reference, application to practice), presentation (graphics, accessibility, learning tool), and reflection. We anticipate our infographic can be repurposed to support learning among other health disciplines, administrative professionals, and the broader public, including high schools and university education.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.417 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Sexuality EducationSame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207