Barriers to and facilitators of South Asian immigrant adolescents’ access to sexual and reproductive health services in Canada: A qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Data on immigrant access to sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services in Canada typically focus on adult populations generally but not adolescents specifically. To fill this gap, this study explored South Asian immigrant adolescents’ perceptions of barriers and facilitators for SRH care and services in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. In this qualitative descriptive study, researchers conducted six focus group semi-structured interviews with South Asian immigrant adolescents who live in Edmonton, Canada. Barriers included fear of stigma and judgment, lack of information about the healthcare system, lack of privacy and youth-friendly SRH services, lack of comprehensive sexuality education, lack of trust of online SRH information, and language barriers. Facilitators included SRH information classes at school, parental support, and provision of free services. South Asian immigrant adolescents expressed their need for more inclusive and relevant sexual health education, more support from parents and teachers with adequate and evidence-based SRH information and effective communication strategies to enhance communication with adolescents, and more youth-driven integrated health promotion programs to allow them to make informed choices. Their voices and perspectives are useful in informing inclusive and youth-centered sexual health education at home, in school, and in the community.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".