The experiences of gender and sexually diverse parents using support and services for their young children: An integrative review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To address: What are the experiences of 2SLGBTQQIA+ parents using parenting supports and services to meet their children's early childhood development needs (<5 years of age)? DESIGN: Whittemore and Knafl's (2005) integrative review methodology. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched from 2000 to October 14, 2022 for empirical studies or reviews addressing the research question. The title and abstract of 12,158 articles were screened for inclusion in the review by two independent researchers; 175 of these articles underwent full-text review. Studies selected were critically appraised using a Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tool. Relevant key findings were extracted from each study and entered into N-VIVO-12. Thematic content analysis was employed and PRISMA guidelines were adhered to. RESULTS: A total of 18 articles (15 qualitative and three multi-method studies) met the inclusion criteria and were selected for the review. Seven themes were revealed from analysis of the studies: (1) 2SLGBTQQIA+ Status kept a secret; (2) Forced to come out; (3) Heteronormative messaging; (4) Feeling excluded; (5) Stigmatised; (6) Parents act as educators; and (7) Positive experiences. CONCLUSION: This integrative review provides nurses with insight into the experiences of 2SLGBTQQIA+ parents using health care services for their young child. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION: This article highlights what changes nurses need to make to their practice to ensure appropriate, inclusive care for clients of diverse sexual and gender identities and their families. IMPACT: Health care providers, especially nurses, have an opportunity to improve the experiences of these families and positively impact their health and well-being. Additionally, there is a need for research with the 2SLGBTQQIA+ parent community and the use of rigorous methodological techniques, including clearly linking participants' gender and sexual identities with study findings, to improve our understanding of 2SLGBTQQIA+ parent experiences. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Although there was no direct patient contribution to the work since it was an integrative review of the literature, indirectly patient contributions are incorporated from the original research results of studies incorporated into this review.
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 | 0.006 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".