Cardiac Healthcare Providers’ Perspectives regarding Sexual Counseling Delivery: A Qualitative Descriptive Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Sexual health and sexual quality of life are integral to a person’s physical and mental health as well as well-being. Nevertheless, there is a dearth of literature on how South Asian healthcare professionals perceive offering sexual health education and counseling to patients within the South Asian context, where discussion of sexuality is considered taboo. Purpose: The aim of this article was to explore healthcare professionals’ perspectives regarding approaches to enhance delivery of sexual counseling to cardiac patients. Methods: A qualitative descriptive study was conducted. Healthcare professionals were recruited using maximum variation sampling and interviewed using a semi-structured interview guide from June to September 2023. Reflexive thematic analysis was used for data analysis. Results: Analysis of the 11 interviews revealed three main themes: (a) gaps in patients’ sexual health knowledge and receipt of counseling, (b) need for health professional training to promote open discussion about sexual health with patients, and (c) activating organizational action to support the provision of sexual counseling. Conclusion: Structural and cultural barriers impede consistent implementation of sexual health assessment and counseling of cardiac patients, despite needs. Sexual health education of professionals across relevant disciplines, structural changes to support healthcare professionals in sexual counseling, provision of sexual health assessment checklists, tools, and practice guidelines, patient education, and providing written sexual health education material in local languages are potential strategies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".