Sexual health and well-being: A study of autistic youth in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sexual health and well-being are important components of overall well-being and quality of life. Yet, little is known about autistic persons’ self-reported sexual health and well-being in Canada. In the current study, 3,551 youth aged 16–24 from across Canada were surveyed, including 419 youth who reported an autism diagnosis or self-identified as autistic. We examined demographic and sexual health data from autistic youth and assessed differences/similarities with non-autistic youth on key indicators. A significantly greater percentage of autistic youth reported a transgender identity (22.5% vs. 1.9%), an asexual identity (7.0% vs. 2.7%), and an LGBQ+ sexual orientation (55.6% vs. 22.3%), compared to non-autistic youth. Autistic youth were just as likely as non-autistic youth to value sexual pleasure. On average, autistic youth rated their sexual health as “good,” and many were happy with their sexual lives. Half were in a committed relationship, and autistic youth in relationships were generally sexually and emotionally satisfied in their relationships. Many had engaged in partnered sexual behaviours (e.g., touching genitals, oral sex, penis–vagina sex), with a higher percentage of autistic youth reporting that they had ever had penis–anal sex (30.8% vs. 22.6%). Autistic youth and non-autistic youth reported similar condom/barrier use for most sexual behaviours. The implications of these findings for sexual health promotion with autistic youth are discussed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".