重新考虑风险:对同性恋、双性恋和其他男男性行为者的性健康研究数据饱和分析得出的见解。

IF 1.7 3区 医学 Q2 FAMILY STUDIES
David James Field, John de Wit, Diane Dixon, David Comer, Chantal Den Daas
{"title":"重新考虑风险:对同性恋、双性恋和其他男男性行为者的性健康研究数据饱和分析得出的见解。","authors":"David James Field, John de Wit, Diane Dixon, David Comer, Chantal Den Daas","doi":"10.1080/13691058.2025.2567290","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study explored how risk in the context of sexual health is conceptualised in research related to gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men during a period of major biomedical change, including the scale-up of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and the Undetectable = Untransmittable (U = U) campaign, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. A systematic search across Medline (OVID), CINAHL, and Scopus identified studies published and/or with data collected between 2015 and 2020, from high-income countries in the Global North. A novel saturation-based approach, adapted from qualitative research, was used to determine when no new implicit or explicit conceptualisations of risk were evident. Ten initial papers were reviewed, followed by sets of three, stopping after saturation was reached at 24 papers. The word 'risk' appeared 722 times across included studies. Hundreds of distinct implicit and explicit conceptualisations were identified and grouped according to five interconnected dimensions: health outcomes, and their focus on biomedical, behavioural, interpersonal, and individual factors. Findings highlight the pervasive yet variable use of 'risk' in the sexual health literature, which may hinder clear communication between researchers, clinicians, and service users. Study findings support calls for the use of more precise language.</p>","PeriodicalId":10799,"journal":{"name":"Culture, Health & Sexuality","volume":" ","pages":"1-12"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Risk reconsidered: insights from a data saturation analysis of sexual health research amongst gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men.\",\"authors\":\"David James Field, John de Wit, Diane Dixon, David Comer, Chantal Den Daas\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13691058.2025.2567290\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study explored how risk in the context of sexual health is conceptualised in research related to gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men during a period of major biomedical change, including the scale-up of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and the Undetectable = Untransmittable (U = U) campaign, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. A systematic search across Medline (OVID), CINAHL, and Scopus identified studies published and/or with data collected between 2015 and 2020, from high-income countries in the Global North. A novel saturation-based approach, adapted from qualitative research, was used to determine when no new implicit or explicit conceptualisations of risk were evident. Ten initial papers were reviewed, followed by sets of three, stopping after saturation was reached at 24 papers. The word 'risk' appeared 722 times across included studies. Hundreds of distinct implicit and explicit conceptualisations were identified and grouped according to five interconnected dimensions: health outcomes, and their focus on biomedical, behavioural, interpersonal, and individual factors. Findings highlight the pervasive yet variable use of 'risk' in the sexual health literature, which may hinder clear communication between researchers, clinicians, and service users. Study findings support calls for the use of more precise language.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10799,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Culture, Health & Sexuality\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-12\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Culture, Health & Sexuality\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13691058.2025.2567290\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"FAMILY STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Culture, Health & Sexuality","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13691058.2025.2567290","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"FAMILY STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究探讨了在生物医学发生重大变化期间,包括在COVID-19大流行之前扩大暴露前预防(PrEP)和不可检测=不可传播(U = U)运动期间,与同性恋、双性恋和其他男男性行为者有关的研究中,性健康背景下的风险是如何概念化的。通过Medline (OVID)、CINAHL和Scopus进行系统搜索,确定了2015年至2020年间发表和/或收集数据的研究,这些研究来自全球北方的高收入国家。一种新的基于饱和的方法,改编自定性研究,用于确定何时没有新的隐含或明确的风险概念是明显的。最初审查了10篇论文,然后是3篇,在24篇论文达到饱和后停止。在纳入的研究中,“风险”一词出现了722次。数百种不同的内隐和外显概念被确定并根据五个相互关联的维度进行分组:健康结果,以及它们对生物医学、行为、人际关系和个人因素的关注。研究结果强调,性健康文献中“风险”一词的使用普遍存在,但各不相同,这可能会阻碍研究人员、临床医生和服务使用者之间的清晰沟通。研究结果支持使用更精确语言的呼吁。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Risk reconsidered: insights from a data saturation analysis of sexual health research amongst gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men.

This study explored how risk in the context of sexual health is conceptualised in research related to gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men during a period of major biomedical change, including the scale-up of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and the Undetectable = Untransmittable (U = U) campaign, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. A systematic search across Medline (OVID), CINAHL, and Scopus identified studies published and/or with data collected between 2015 and 2020, from high-income countries in the Global North. A novel saturation-based approach, adapted from qualitative research, was used to determine when no new implicit or explicit conceptualisations of risk were evident. Ten initial papers were reviewed, followed by sets of three, stopping after saturation was reached at 24 papers. The word 'risk' appeared 722 times across included studies. Hundreds of distinct implicit and explicit conceptualisations were identified and grouped according to five interconnected dimensions: health outcomes, and their focus on biomedical, behavioural, interpersonal, and individual factors. Findings highlight the pervasive yet variable use of 'risk' in the sexual health literature, which may hinder clear communication between researchers, clinicians, and service users. Study findings support calls for the use of more precise language.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
4.50%
发文量
80
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信