Sexual health experiences of women and non-binary people with early psychosis: qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Women and gender-diverse people with early psychosis are at risk for suboptimal sexual health outcomes, yet little research has explored their sexual health experiences. Aims This study explored sexual health experiences and related priorities among women and gender-diverse people with early psychosis, to identify opportunities for improvements in sexual health and well-being. Method Semi-structured individual qualitative interviews explored how patient participants (n = 19, aged 18–31 years, cisgender and transgender women and non-binary individuals) receiving clinical care from early psychosis programmes in Ontario, Canada, experienced their sexual health, including sexual function and behaviour. Thematic analysis was conducted, with triangulation from interviews/focus groups with clinicians (n = 36) who provide sexual and mental healthcare for this population. Results Three key themes were identified based on patient interviews: theme 1 was the impact of psychotic illness and its treatments on sexual function and activity, including variable changes in sex drive, attitudes and behaviours during acute psychosis, vulnerability to trauma and medications; theme 2 related to intimacy and sexual relationships in the context of psychosis, with bidirectional effects between relationships and mental health; and theme 3 comprised autonomy, identity and intersectional considerations, including gender, sexuality, culture and religion, which interplay with psychosis and sexual health. Clinicians raised each of these priority areas, but emphasised risk prevention relative to patients’ more holistic view of their sexual health and well-being. Conclusions Women and non-binary people with early psychosis have wide-ranging sexual health priorities, affecting many facets of their lives. Clinical care should incorporate this knowledge to optimise sexual health and well-being in this population.
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 | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".