Internet-based sexual health resources for those living with spinal cord injury: A content analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context: Spinal cord injuries (SCIs) disrupt physiological functioning which can significantly impact sexuality. Those with SCI may rely heavily on Internet sexual health resources for many reasons. Evaluation of current internet health resources is warranted to identify the gaps in the literature.Objectives: The aim of this study was to conduct a purposive review of available Internet sexual health resources for those with SCI.Methods: A Google search was completed with search terms such as: “SCI and sexual functioning”, “SCI and sexuality”, “SCI and pregnancy” and “SCI and sexual pleasure”. Resources were selected if they: (1) provided sexual health education to those with SCI; (2) were designed to increase skills-based learning or influence attitudes and beliefs; and (3) in English language. All identified resources were imported to NVivo 1.5.1 where a thematic content analysis was conducted.Results: The search resulted in 123 resources meeting the criteria. The most common themes included: Sexual functioning (in 83.7% of resources), Reproductive health (67.5%) and Impact of Secondary Complications (61.8%). The least common themes were Psychosocial (24.4%), Stigma (13.8%), and Quality of Life (12.2%). No information was coded for LGBTQ+.Discussion: Sexual health and SCI information focuses primarily on heterosexual males and specifically on sexual functioning. Resources addressing female sexuality were extremely limited and focused largely on reproduction. There was a complete absence of resource aimed to address LGBTQ+ people.Conclusion: The results demonstrate a need for Internet-based sexual health education resources to meet the needs of diverse individuals including women and gender non-conforming people.
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 | 0.010 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.018 | 0.019 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".