Condoms and Contradictions: Assessing Sexual Health Knowledge in Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans, and Queer Youth Labelled with Intellectual Disabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>Background: Accessible, culturally relevant data collection tools to assess the sexual health knowledge of lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer and questioning (LGBTQ) young people labelled with intellectual disabilities are sparse. Materials and Methods: Using community-based participatory research (CBPR) we piloted a variety of interactive activities designed to assess the sexual health knowledge and decision making skills of LGBTQ young people with intellectual disabilities. Results: Posters created by youth participants suggested substantial sexual health knowledge and empowerment, while individual knowledge assessment scores indicated a range in understanding of risks and strategies to avoid pregnancy, HIV and herpes. Conclusions: These findings reinforce the importance of using multiple strategies to assess sexual knowledge with this population. Creative evaluation strategies catering to the cultural specificities, sexual experiences, and cognitive abilities of diverse youth help to clarify gaps in knowledge and areas for renewed attention. Keywords: HIV/AIDS; community-based participatory research; intellectual disabilities; lesbian, gay, bisexual, and trans (LGBT); sexual health Les outils de collecte des données, accessibles et culturellement appropriés, afin d’évaluer les connaissances sur la santé sexuelle des jeunes LGBT (Lesbiennes, Gais, Bisexuel-les et Trans) ayant des handicaps intellectuels sont rares. Nous avons pilotés une variété d’activités interactives ayant pour but l’évaluation des connaissances en santé sexuelle et des compétences pour la prise de décision de jeunes LGBT ayant des handicaps intellectuels. Les affiches créées par les jeunes participants indiquent une responsabilisation et une connaissance approfondie de la santé sexuelle. Les résultats des évaluations de la connaissance en santé sexuelle indiquent une bonne compréhension des risques et des stratégies pour éviter la grossesse, Le VIH et l’herpès. Les résultats obtenus renforcent l’importance d’utiliser diverses stratégies pour évaluer la connaissance en santé sexuelle de cette population. Des stratégies d’évaluation créatives qui adressent les spécificités culturelles, les expériences sexuelles et les habilités cognitives de différents jeunes aident à clarifier les lacunes en connaissance et les domaines qui nécessitent une attention accrue. Mots-clés: VIH/SIDA; recherche participative axée sur la communauté; handicaps intellectuels; (LGBT) lesbiennes, gais, bisexuel-les et trans; santé sexuelle</p>
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".