Reconceptualizing biomedical paradigms for contraceptive care through feminist poststructuralism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the specificities of contraceptive care, sexual health is comprehensively defined as overall physical, emotional, mental, and social well-being related to sexuality, including experiences that are safe, pleasurable, and free of coercion. However, due to the predominance of biomedical paradigms that promote and espouse ‘unbiased’ and ‘objective’ contraceptive care practices, comprehensive, inclusive, and safe sexual health care remains limited. In this article, we argue that feminist poststructuralist knowledge is needed to reconceptualize sexual health care, ultimately promoting reproductive justice through social change and advancement of reproductive rights. We demonstrate how nursing as a discipline and profession can utilize feminist poststructuralist theoretical perspectives to challenge dominant discourses within contraceptive care and lead to the delivery of equity-owed contraceptive and sexual health care for cisgender women and people who can get pregnant.
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 | 0.022 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.129 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".