MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3211880011 · doi:10.1111/hae.14447

Sexual issues in people with haemophilia: Awareness and strategies for overcoming communication barriers

2021· article· en· W3211880011 on OpenAlexaffabout
Greig Blamey, Becky Van Tassel, Elizabeth Sagermann, Ann Marie Stain, Linda Waterhouse, Alfonso Iorio

Bibliographic record

VenueHaemophilia · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemophilia Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsImpactMcMaster UniversityMcMaster Children's HospitalHamilton Health SciencesHospital for Sick ChildrenVirtual Materials Group (Canada)Health Sciences Centre
FundersNovo Nordisk
KeywordsMedicineHaemophiliaPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The Haemophilia Experiences, Results and Opportunities (HERO) Study identified sexual health as an important psychosocial issue affecting people with haemophilia (PWH) worldwide. However, sexual health is inadequately addressed at haemophilia treatment centres (HTCs), because PWH and healthcare professionals (HCPs) experience barriers to broaching the subject. There is a clear need for HCP training to support communication in this area and improve comprehensive care. AIM: The Sexual Health: Strategies for Effective Communication pilot programme was trialled in Canada to assess HCP readiness and ability to discuss sexual health issues with PWH and test communication tools to facilitate these conversations. METHODS: The pilot programme consisted of two 3-h sessions attended by seven HCPs from Calgary's Alberta Children's and Foothills Hospitals. The sessions included lectures and case scenarios and explained the check-in-affirm-clarify-answer and head-heart-body tools designed by the Centre for Sexuality to aid communication. The pilot was evaluated through discussions and an online questionnaire. RESULTS: The pilot was well received by all HCP participants. Questionnaire data showed improvements in participants' knowledge, skills and comfort level in conducting sexual health discussions. Greatest improvements were noted in knowledge (100% 'good' or 'excellent' after the pilot, compared with 29% beforehand). Importantly, 86% felt that the material presented would be applicable in clinical practice. CONCLUSION: The Canadian pilot demonstrated the effectiveness of the proposed educational programme. The underlying principles could be adapted to similar programmes for other HTCs to facilitate sexual health discussions.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHaemophiliaSame topicHemophilia Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207