MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405542010 · doi:10.1080/00224499.2024.2429535

Sexual Behavior in Sexual Minority and Non-Minority Youth from Eight European Countries

2024· article· en· W4405542010 on OpenAlexafffund
András Költő, Honor Young, Malachi Willis, Emmanuelle Godeau, Saoirse Nic Gabhainn, Elizabeth Saewyc

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sex Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of GalwayUniversitetet i BergenUniversity of GlasgowHealth and Care Research Wales
KeywordsSexual intercourseOddsSexual minorityPsychologyDemographyReproductive healthNational Survey of Family GrowthDevelopmental psychologySexual orientationPopulationMedicineSocial psychologyFamily planningSociologyLogistic regression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sexual minority youth, compared to their heterosexual peers, have a disproportionate burden of sexual risks, but it remains unclear whether such inequalities exist across cultures and countries. We used data from eight European countries participating in the 2018 Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) study to analyze sexual behavior in representative samples of adolescents aged 14.5–16.5 years (N = 10,583). Overall, 19.1% of the participants reported that they had had sexual intercourse. Compared to their non-minority peers (those exclusively attracted to opposite-gender partners), sexual minority youth – attracted to same- or both-gender partners – were significantly more likely to report having had sexual intercourse and sex before age 14. Those attracted to both-gender partners had similar odds of having had sexual intercourse, but higher odds of not using condoms, or neither condoms nor contraceptive pill use at last intercourse. Those not attracted to anyone had similar odds of having had sexual intercourse but were more likely to report early sex and not using protection at last intercourse. Adjusting for gender, country and family affluence did not substantially change the pattern of results. In interpreting the findings, the onset of puberty, sexual abuse, stigma management and experimentation with sexual identity should be considered. We discuss the practical, clinical and research implications of the findings.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.121
Threshold uncertainty score0.959

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Sex ResearchSame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207