“<i>It’s not just some cookie cutter that you have to fit into</i>”: A qualitative study of immigrant women and girls’ needs, experiences, and barriers to sexual and reproductive health education in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sexual and reproductive health (SRH) education is important for all individuals. Immigrant women and girls frequently experience barriers to accessing SRH services and encounter discrimination in educational settings. Thus, it is critical to evaluate if the needs of immigrant women and girls are met with the current SRH education. In this study, three focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted with immigrant women ( n = 10) living across Canada, with the goal of identifying key barriers and areas of improvement for the SRH curriculum. Our FGDs revealed four main themes: (1) barriers to accessing SRH education, (2) limitations of mainstream SRH, (3) alternative means of accessing SRH information, and (4) features of more inclusive SRH education. Main barriers to effective and inclusive SRH education in this group included language and cultural aspects. Moreover, the current Canadian SRH curriculum was experienced by participants as Western-centric, heteronormative, and disconnected from other aspects of health and wellness. Participants emphasized the need for consideration of safety and accessibility when creating educational spaces and resources. We recommend that our findings be used by the respective Minister of Education in each province of Canada, in order to improve Canadian SRH educational programmes and to better meet the needs of diverse populations.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".