Empowering the search for pleasure, health and well‐being outside heteronormative definitions: The role of evaluation in shaping structurally sensitive programming for 2SGBTQ+ men who <i>Party and Play</i> in Ontario
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Sexualized drug use, also known as Party and Play (PnP, chemsex) is a phenomenon that is increasingly pervasive among 2SGBTQ+ communities in Canada and has been epidemiologically linked to increased risk of HIV and other sexually transmitted and blood‐borne illnesses (STBBI). The phenomenon is highly stigmatized even within 2SGBTQ+ communities, perpetuating discrimination against individuals who PnP. Consequently, such individuals often remain invisible to formal care systems. Even as public health efforts seek to reduce the harms associated with PnP, narrowly epidemiological understandings of the phenomenon without understanding it from the perspectives of those with living experience of it, and—without attention to how historical, socio‐structural, and cultural factors shape the phenomenon—contribute to the stigmatization, disempowerment, and marginalization of people who PnP from healthcare access. In this chapter, we describe how an evaluation‐driven program design process grounded in the transformative evaluation paradigm and the principles of LGBTQ+ evaluation supported a paradigm shift for one public health agency in how they re‐conceptualized a more empowering approach for engaging people who PnP in dignified, meaningful care.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it