CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 181

Accessing sexual health information online: use, motivations and consequences for youth with different sexual orientations

Mitchell, K. J., Ybarra, M. L., Korchmaros, J. D., Kosciw, J. G.·2014·Health Education Research
DOI 10.1093/her/cyt071
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/her/cyt071

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Overblocking weighs most heavily on those who lack accessible sources of information offline; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning adolescents are particularly reliant on the Internet for information about health and relationships.

    “Overblocking weighs most heavily on those who lack accessible sources of information offline; research suggests that lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning adolescents, for example, are particularly reliant on the Internet for information about health and relationships.17,18”

    From Internet Filtering and Adolescent Exposure to Online Sexual Material (2018) · cites this paper as [17]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 23

  1. Ybarra M, Suman M. Reasons, assessments, and actions taken: sex and age differences in uses of Internet health information. Health Educ Res 2008; 23: 512-21.
  2. Buhi ER et al. An observational study of how young people search for online sexual health information. J Am Coll Health 2009; 58: 101-11.
  3. Baxter L, Egbert N, Ho E. Everyday health communication experiences of college students. J Am Coll Health 2008; 56: 427-36.
  4. Borzekowski DL, Rickert VI. Adolescent cybersurfing for health information: a new resource that crosses barriers. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2001; 155: 813-7.
  5. Escoffery C et al. Internet use for health information among college students. J Am Coll Health 2005; 53: 183-8.
  6. Lerner RM, Galambos NL. Adolescent development: chal- lenges and opportunities for research, programs, and policies. Annu Rev Psychol 1998; 49: 413-46.
  7. Petersen AC. Adolescent development. Annu Rev Psychol 1988; 39: 583-607.
  8. Gray NJ et al. Adolescent girls' use of the Internet for health information: issues beyond access. J Med Syst 2002; 26: 545-53.
  9. Ybarra ML, Suman M. Help seeking behavior and the Internet: a national survey. Int J Med Inform 2006; 75: 29-41.
  10. Gray NJ et al. Health information-seeking behaviour in ado- lescence: the place of the Internet. Soc Sci Med 2005; 60: 1467-78.
  11. Kubicek K et al. In the dark: Young men's stories of sexual initiation in the absence of relevant sexual health informa- tion. Health Educ Behav 2010; 37: 243-63.
  12. Friedman CK, Morgan EM. Comparing sexual-minority and heterosexual young women's friends and parents as sources of support for sexual issues. J Youth Adolesc 2009; 38: 920-36.
  13. Doty ND et al. Sexuality related social support among les- bian, gay, and bisexual youth. J Youth Adolesc 2010; 39: 1134-47.
  14. Mustanski B, Lyons T, Garcia SC. Internet use and sexual health of young men who have sex with men: a mixed-meth- ods study. Arch Sex Behav 2011; 40: 289-300.
  15. DeHaan S et al. The interplay between online and offline explorations of identity, relationships, and sex: a mixed- methods study with LGBT youth. J Sex Res 2012; 50: 421-34.
  16. Schonlau M et al. A comparison between response from a propensity-weighted Web survey and an identical RDD survey. Soc Sci Comput Rev 2004; 22: 128-38.
  17. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB. Reducing bias in observational studies using subclassification on the propensity score. J Am Stat Assoc 1984; 79: 516-24.
  18. Berrens RP et al. The advent of Internet surveys for political research: a comparison of telephone and Internet samples. Polit Anal 2003; 11: 1-22.
  19. Terhanian G et al. The record of Internet-based opinion polls in predicting the results of 72 races in the November 2000 US elections. Int J Mark Res 2001; 43: 127-38.
  20. Berrens RP et al. Information and effort in contingent valu- ation surveys: application to global climate change using national internet samples. J Environ Econ Manage 2004; 47: 331-63.
  21. Ybarra ML et al. Associations between bullying and suicidal ideation in a national sample of lesbian, gay, bisex- ual, questioning, and heterosexual adolescents (under review).
  22. Russell, ST, Thomas JC, Justin C. Are teens "post-gay"? Contemporary adolescents' sexual identity labels. Journal of Youth and Adolescence 2009; 38: 884-90.
  23. Hillier L, Mitchell KJ, Ybarra ML. The Internet as a safety net: findings from a series of online focus groups with LGB and non-LGB young people in the United States. J LGBT Youth 2012; 9: 225-46.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mitchell, K. J., Ybarra, M. L., Korchmaros, J. D., & Kosciw, J. G.
Venue
Health Education Research
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2013-07-16
Volume
29
Issue
1
Pages
147-157
ISSN
  • 0268-1153
  • 1465-3648
DOI
10.1093/her/cyt071
Cited by
181
References
2
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review