Feasibility of Sexual Health and Contraceptive Web Services for Adolescents and Young Adults: Retrospective Study of a Pilot Program on Reunion Island
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Sexual health indicators for adolescents and young adults (AYAs) aged between 13 and 25 years are particularly poor on Reunion Island. Access to accurate information as well as sexual health and contraceptive services are vital to maintaining sexual well-being. Teleconsultations offer a promising approach to addressing the sexual health and contraceptive needs of AYAs who are more susceptible to engaging in unprotected sexual intercourse. However, the literature on digital sexual health services for this demographic group is limited. Objective: This study aims to describe the feasibility of a pilot sexual health and contraceptive teleconsultation web service used by AYAs on Reunion Island. Methods: A descriptive, retrospective study was conducted at the Reunion Island University Hospital Center using a convenient sample. Eligible participants were informed about the program through various communication channels, including seminars for health care professionals, radio broadcasts, posters, flyers, press articles, videos, and social media posts. AYAs accessed a web-based platform named SEXTUOZE from December 15, 2021, to September 30, 2022, that offered sexual health information and teleconsultations. Data collected included participant and teleconsultation characteristics, patient satisfaction, and the quality of completeness of medical records. Results: A total of 22 teleconsultations were scheduled and 7 were completed, all via synchronous video communication (duration: median 35 min). Overall, 4731 sessions were generated on the SEXTUOZE website. Reasons cited for accessing the web services were to seek sexual health advice (8/22, 36%), receive an initial birth control prescription (12/22, 55%), and inquire about condom prescriptions (2/22, 9%). Conclusions: While teleconsultation use for sexual health was initially low, it rose toward the end of the study period. Considering all elements of the implementation theory, future research should design interventions that not only are more operative and tailored but also ensure their adoption and sustainability in various health contexts.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".