Older portuguese and mexican adults and sexual well-being? A cross-cultural qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction A cross-cultural qualitative study about older portuguese and mexican adults and sexual well-being. Objectives Sexual well-being (SWB) refers to the subjective emotional and cognitive evaluation of the quality of the individual's sexuality, it plays a relevant role in quality of life and health promotion on old age and has cross-cultural implications. The aim of this study is to analyse comparatively the perspectives of older adults on their SWB in Portugal and Mexico. Methods Data were collected from 86 Portuguese and 80 Mexican community-dwelling participants aged 65 years and older, using a semi-structured interview protocol. Older adults were inquired about their perceptions on what contributes to their sexual well-being. Socio-demographic data were also enquired. Content analysis was used to identify key themes. Results Outcomes indicated eight themes: eroticism, supportive relationship, positive self-concept, health and self-care, romance, active life, tenderness and care, and no pain and no pregnancy restrictions, for both samples. Eroticism was the most frequent theme reported by Portuguese participants (31.4%) and health and self-care were the most frequent theme reported by Mexican participants (26.5%). Conclusions The empirical results of this study indicated that SWB is strongly influenced by socio-cultural and psychosocial values. This cross-cultural comparison between Portugal and Mexico contributes to understand this concept in old age with different perspectives and place a scenario for future culture-adapted interventions and comprehensive policies. Disclosure No significant relationships.
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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".