MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4249598345 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14668152

The sexual health education experiences of Eritrean women in Toronto: an evaluation of the Raising Sexually Healthy Children (RSHC) Program

2021· preprint· en· W4249598345 on OpenAlexaffabout
Julie Keech

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican Sexualities and LGBTQ+ Issues
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTabooReproductive healthImmigrationOpenness to experienceMedicineHealth educationPsychologyPolitical scienceNursingPopulationEnvironmental healthPublic healthSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Very few studies have focused on the health knowledge and practices of Eritrean women and their children in Canada. The research surrounding Eritrean women and their children’s awareness and exposure to sexual health education is even far more limited. This study aims to fill this gap in immigrant health research though an evaluation of the Raising Sexually Healthy Children (RSHC) Project, a sexual health education program for immigrant parents in Toronto. Evaluation is based on the Eritrean women’s experiences of the RSHC Program as well any challenges and benefits they encountered throughout its implementation. Six Eritrean women including four program participants as well as two program coordinators were interviewed. Findings indicated that despite the cultural taboo of discussing issues of sexual health, the women gained a greater sense of confidence, openness, and acceptance towards this topic. The study concluded that the RSHC program was successful in assisting the Eritrean women participants to develop effective sexual health communication with their children, family members, and wider 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.249
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.379 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAfrican Sexualities and LGBTQ+ IssuesFrench-language works237,207