MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414805935 · doi:10.1016/j.puhip.2025.100664

SOGIE-diverse inclusivity: An analysis of 2SLGBTQ+ representation on Ontario, Canada public health unit websites

2025· article· en· W4414805935 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Tin D. Vo, Todd Coleman, Cameron McKenzie, Kyran Ferrier, George K. Henry, Alik Sarian, Ruth A. Cameron, Charlie Davis, Daniel Grace, LLana James, Nick J. Mulé

Bibliographic record

VenuePublic Health in Practice · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityWilfrid Laurier UniversityYork UniversityPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPublic healthUnit (ring theory)Representation (politics)Health informationMental healthWork (physics)Health equity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: The objectives of this study were to: 1) examine how often sexual orientation, gender identity and expression (SOGIE)-diverse terms appeared on websites of public health units (PHUs) in Ontario, Canada, and 2) determine the contexts within which these terms appeared on these PHU websites. Study design: This study employed a summative content analysis of 34 Ontario PHU websites. Methods: The study involved compiling a list of SOGIE-diverse terms, searched PHU websites using their integrated search systems, and retrieved webpages where relevant search terms were found. The data analysis included enumerating how often the SOGIE-diverse terms appeared and summarizing the contexts within which the terminology appeared on the 34 PHU websites. Results: Across these websites, terms commonly found were variations of "LGBT," "sexual/sexuality," and identity terms, including "bisexual," "gay," "queer," and "lesbian." SOGIE-diverse communities were reflected in two broad categories: sexual health and infectious diseases; and mental health, SOGIE-diversity discrimination, and resources. Conclusions: In this website review, most PHUs offer some relevant information about and for SDCs; however, they also lacked in specific, SOGIE-relevant ways. While sexual health and mental health are pertinent concerns, this myopic view of relevant health concerns for SOGIE-diverse communities excludes holistic health conceptualizations and lacks nuanced understanding of SDCs' rich lived experiences. The implications of this work are to ensure that PHUs have mutual understanding of SOGIE-diversity related terms, and how they represent SDCs via their websites and the information and services offered for these communities. Ontario PHUs, especially through public-facing platforms such as websites, have a unique opportunity to educate both SDCs and the broader public. Clear, consistent, and collaborative communication can minimize inequitable health outcomes for these communities.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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 score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.217

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0070.011
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.160
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 venuePublic Health in PracticeSame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207