MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414647367 · doi:10.3138/cjhs-2025-0037

Sexual health literacy and access to inclusive education: Investigating disparities between cisgender heterosexual and 2SLGBTQIA+ young adults

2025· article· en· W4414647367 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Phoebe Hodgson, Laura M. Moore, Jessica P. Lougheed

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health
Canadian institutionsOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReproductive healthYoung adultSexual identityHeterosexualitySexual minoritySafer sexHealth equitySAFERHuman sexuality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous studies have assessed students’ perceived quality of school-based sexual health education (SHE); however, there is a paucity of research on sexual health literacy, especially involving 2SLGBTQIA+ participants. Many school-based programs teach sexual health from a heteronormative lens, which means that 2SLGBTQIA+ youth may not have their educational needs fully met. This study examined SHE experiences, sexual health literacy, sources of sexual health information, and engagement in safer sex practices among young adults (aged 16–24 years) who received SHE in Canada in middle and/or high school. A total of 913 participants were divided into two groups, sexual and gender minority (SGM; n = 392) versus cisgender heterosexual (CH; n = 518). SGM participants reported that the SHE they received was significantly less affirming and inclusive of their identity than CH participants. SGM participants used the internet as a source of information about sexual health significantly more than CH participants; however, the groups did not differ on the other sources. SGM participants scored significantly higher on the sexual health literacy questionnaire. SGM participants reported engaging in safer sex practices significantly more than CH participants for penile–anal intercourse; otherwise, the groups did not differ in safer sex practices. This research contributes to our understanding of the role of identity and SHE in sexual health literacy, which may inform curriculum standards and policies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.103
Threshold uncertainty score0.204

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.136
GPT teacher head0.492
Teacher spread0.357 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Human SexualitySame topicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive HealthFrench-language works237,207