N32 Providing sexual well-being support to patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: analyzing the practices of international nurses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is often diagnosed in early adulthood and affects individuals’ sex life. People living with IBD report sexual dysfunction and reduced sexual satisfaction. While previous studies have demonstrated patients’ need for information about sexual health from healthcare providers, nurses’ practices for individuals’ sexual well-being (SWB) remain unclear. This study aimed to identify international nurses’ SWB support practices for patients with IBD. Methods This is an international qualitative study. Nurses with substantial experience in IBD nursing were recruited between May 2023 and October 2024 using a snowball sampling method, and online semi-structured and focus group interviews were conducted. After completing data coding, the results for each country were merged and analyzed as one dataset. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the data. Results A total of 29 nurses (male: 5; female: 24) from Japan, the UK, Ireland, Australia, and Canada were interviewed, and the focus group interviews were conducted at two sites in Japan. The mean years of experience in IBD nursing were 13 years. The thematic analysis led to the overarching theme of ‘Careful exploration in real life practice’ with the identification of the following primary themes: ‘Building the foundation for SWB care’, ‘Addressing SWB issues as a team’, ‘Identifying SWB needs’, and ‘Providing personalized nursing support’. These themes reflected the lack of SWB education in the foundation of nursing training, resulting in nurses being unprepared and lacking confidence in providing support, and the ways that support is provided in practice in the absence of formal education to address SWB as a tailored practice. Nurses strive to support SWB among individuals with IBD despite the challenges they encounter and the reticence to initiate the conversation. Conclusion All nurses reported that SWB support for patients with IBD was provided after establishing trust and working together as a team to support them. In addition, as sexual concerns are highly individualized, the nurses assessed each person’s life events and situations of need and engaged in practices tailored to their concerns. This was done by creating an environment that encouraged individuals to share their thoughts. Cultural aspects that make discussing SWB difficult stem from a general view of sex as taboo; this was observed regardless of the participants’ geographical provenience. Finally, nurses’ training needs for SWB education are similar, regardless of the participants’ demographics.
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 | 0.006 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".