MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404991676 · doi:10.1016/j.xagr.2024.100428

Barriers and facilitators to telemedicine contraception among patients that speak Spanish: a qualitative study

2024· article· en· W4404991676 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Marielle E. Meurice, Gennifer Kully, Sarah Averbach, Antoinette Marengo, Jesse Nodora, Maricela Cervantes, Sheila K. Mody

Bibliographic record

VenueAJOG Global Reports · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Contraception
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPartenariat Canadien Contre Le CancerSociety of Family PlanningBayer
KeywordsTelemedicineQualitative researchMedicineFamily medicineMedical educationNursingPsychologyHealth carePolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Telemedicine contraception services have increased since the COVID-19 pandemic. There may be unique equity implications and language barriers for patients who speak Spanish. Objective: To identify the barriers and facilitators of telemedicine for contraception care among patients who speak Spanish using a community-based participatory research approach. Study Design: The study was designed and conducted in consultation with a community advisory board. We interviewed 20 patients after telemedicine and in-person contraception visits conducted in Spanish at Planned Parenthood of the Pacific Southwest in Southern California between April 2022 and May 2023. Telemedicine visits were conducted by audio only. Two coders analyzed the data using thematic analysis. Results: The average age of the participants was 32.5 years old (range 19-45). Most participants had some college education (13/20, 65.0%) and public insurance (18/20, 90.0%). Most chose a short-acting contraceptive method (11/20, 55.0%). Five key themes were identified. (1) Participants reported less comfort with video technology and a preference to not be seen during the appointment, therefore preferring audio-only for telemedicine visits. (2) Participants did not report difficulty with Spanish interpreters using telemedicine. (3) Telemedicine has conveniences related to time, work, childcare, and transportation but may have inconveniences related to method receipt. (4) Preference for physical exam and preventative care and familiarity with the in-clinic model motivated people who sought in-person care rather than technology barriers with telemedicine. (5) There is trust in the privacy and confidentiality of the visits, but privacy at home for the individual may impact choice for in-person care. Conclusion: Among patients who speak Spanish, telemedicine contraception care was acceptable and had many conveniences. Many patients who speak Spanish preferred audio-only for telemedicine contraception visits. Use of interpreters and technology were not perceived barriers to care.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.796

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.336 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAJOG Global ReportsSame topicReproductive Health and ContraceptionFrench-language works237,207