MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W98442318

How a woman's sexual adjustment after sustaining a spinal cord injury impacts sexual health interventions.

2004· article· en· W98442318 on OpenAlexaff
Marcille Ekland, Barbara Lawrie

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsGF Strong Rehabilitation CentreVancouver Coastal Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionIntervention (counseling)Reproductive healthSpinal cord injuryClinical psychologyPsychologyMedicineQualitative researchAffect (linguistics)PsychiatrySpinal cordPopulation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This qualitative study describes the female experience of sexual adjustment after spinal cord injury (SCI) in relation to the need for sexual health intervention. Ten women with SCI were interviewed using a predetermined, semistructured set of questions. Audiotaping and field notes were utilized to gather data. The investigators used consensus validation to complete data analysis, and all research findings were reviewed by the study participants for validation. Clinical findings indicated that there were a series of phases that women go through in sexual adjustment that affect when and how interventions were effective in meeting their sexual health needs. Women also identified the use of peers and support groups as essential adjuncts to professional intervention.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.308 · 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

Citations6
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicSpinal Cord Injury Research→French-language works237,207→