MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387245554 · doi:10.5195/jmla.2023.1661

LGBTQ+ health research guides: a multi-institutional analysis of usage patterns and user information needs

2023· article· en· W4387245554 on OpenAlexaff
Gregg Stevens, Martin Morris, Robin Parker, Francisco Fajardo, Erica R. Brody, Katie McLean

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Medical Library Association JMLA · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsKellogg's (Canada)Nova Scotia Health AuthorityDalhousie UniversityMcGill University
FundersVirginia Commonwealth University
KeywordsResource (disambiguation)Information needsComputer scienceCoding (social sciences)World Wide WebHealth careKnowledge managementData scienceSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: LGBTQ+ health research guides can strengthen the LGBTQ+ community through connecting people to quality health services and information, and previous studies have recommended that health sciences libraries create and maintain these guides. Little evidence exists, though, on how these guides are used and how well they meet the needs of LGBTQ+ users. Using retrospective data retrieved from multiple LGBTQ+ health research guides, we examined the categories of LGBTQ+ health information most used, as well as how often guides were accessed. Based on these results, we hope to find patterns which can lead to best practices for libraries. Methods: Five North American academic health sciences libraries contributed select usage data from their LGBTQ+ health research guides, covering a three-year period (July 2018-June 2021). Data was analyzed in two ways. Firstly, the 20 most-clicked resources from each guide were categorized through open coding, to assess if certain information resource categories were more popular among guide users, allowing for inference of user needs. A time-series analysis was also conducted for two sites, using the Classical Seasonal Decomposition by Moving Averages method, to provide deeper insights into the data. Results: Open coding data showed consumer health information resources were used more often than other health resource categories. Resources from more locally based organizations and those with provider and services information were heavily used, indicating that users may be looking for information connecting to local health services and providers. The time series analysis allowed the potential positive effect of guide promotion to be showcased in ways that would not have been clear from the raw data. Conclusion: This study shows that people are accessing LGBTQ+ consumer health information through academic library research guides, with a preference for local information. Guide usage appears to be positively driven by outreach within one's institution and to the greater community. Locating external partners may increase guide impact and provide important links to local resources and services.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score0.936

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.344 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Medical Library Association JMLASame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207