Conceptualizations of sexual health from the perspectives of Asian Indian American women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sexual health is an integral part of the overall well-being of women of color. Information about the sexual health of Asian Indian women who are brought up within the U.S. and the contextual factors which play a role in their views on sexual health is lacking. Even less is known about the experience and impact of navigating two sets of cultural beliefs (i.e., that of their heritage culture and that of the dominant U.S. society) on sexual health development for Asian Indian women raised in the U.S. The proposed study is designed to understand the sexual health perspectives of Asian Indian women raised in the U.S. This study was a qualitative investigation conducted in order to identify how sexual health is conceptualized by Asian Indian women who are exposed to the sexual health values and norms of the mainstream U.S. society and that of their heritage culture. Eleven heterosexual Asian Indian women, of 1.5 and second generation, were interviewed in person and over the phone. During the interview process participants defined their perspectives on sexual health and identified sociocultural factors which played a role in how they conceptualized sexual health. A grounded theory approach was used to analyze the data. The core phenomenon of this study, referred to as a storyline, revolved around participants struggle to navigate two opposing cultures, their views on sexual health, and the process by which they formulated their perspectives. Consistent with past research on 1.5 and second generation South Asian women, experiences related to sexual health for this sample were impacted by traditional cultural values, the norms of mainstream society, and participants' individual momentum.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".