MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309363365 · doi:10.1080/00224499.2022.2148239

A Validation Study of the Global Measure of Sexual Satisfaction in Sexually Active Adolescents

2022· article· en· W4309363365 on OpenAlexafffund
Noémie Bigras, Jacinthe Dion, Beáta Bőthe, E. Sandra Byers, Mariane Aumais, Sophie Bergeron

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sex Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à ChicoutimiUniversity of New BrunswickUniversité de Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsSexually activeMeasure (data warehouse)PsychologyClinical psychologyDemographyComputer scienceSociologyPopulationData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Positive views of adolescents’ sexuality have only begun to garner interest in the last two decades. Despite great strides in this emerging area, progress is limited by the paucity of valid and reliable measures among this population. The goal of this study was to validate the widely used adult five-item Global Measure of Sexual Satisfaction (GMSEX) in a large sample of sexually active adolescents. A total of 1,036 adolescents (516 girls, 49.8%) aged between 14 and 17 years (Mage = 14.62; SD = 0.66) were recruited to investigate the reliability and validity of the GMSEX. The GMSEX yielded strong psychometric properties in adolescents, including factor structure, measurement invariance, and reliability. Results showed that the scale works similarly for boys and girls as well as for heterosexual, cisgender, and sexual minority adolescents. The GMSEX is a short, reliable, and valid measure of sexual satisfaction that can be used in future studies focusing on adolescents’ sexuality and 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 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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.261
GPT teacher head0.522
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Sex ResearchSame topicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive HealthFrench-language works237,207