Prevention of sexually transmitted diseases among visually impaired people: educational text validation

Abstract

Objective: to validate an educational text in the context of Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STD) for visually impaired persons, making it accessible to this population. Method: a validation study, in a virtual environment. Data collection occurred from May to September 2012 by emailing the subjects, and was composed by seven content experts about STDs. Analysis was based on the considerations of the experts about Objectives, Structure and Presentation, and Relevance. Results: on the Objectives and Structure and Presentation blocks, 77 (84.6%) and 48 (85.7%) were fully adequate or appropriate, respectively. In the Relevance block, items 3.2 - Allows transfer and generalization of learning, and 3.5 - Portrays aspects needed to clarify the family, showed bad agreement indices of 0.42 and 0.57, respectively. The analysis was followed by reformulating the text according to the relevant suggestions. Conclusion: the text was validated regarding the content of sexually transmitted diseases. A total of 35 stanzas were removed and nine others included, following the recommendations of the experts.

Aquisição de conhecimentos sobre saúde sexual por pessoas cegas: uma pesquisa-ação

“…In Brazil, although there are policies focused on the sexual and reproductive rights of people with disabilities, attitudinal barriers undermine social participation. This context has deserved researchers attention to the need for validation of assistive technologies adapted to people with visual impairment ( 11 ) and aimed at health education in primary care, school or other environment, with a view to sensitizing visually impaired women for the use of the female condom ( 23 ) .…”

“…Although the women in this study claimed to have unprotected sex, they all knew the ways of preventing STIs, but considerable numbers of men were unaware of them. It is understood that misinformation in the context of sexual health entails limitations for people, since they require specific components for access to information ( 11 ) , in addition to expanding the possibilities of contracting an STI. STIs, such as Trichomonas vaginalis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae and Human Papillomavirus, reported by the participants, are considered a global public health problem ( 27 ) .…”

“…This characteristic is limited to the educational intervention used as innovative health technology, which used a consolidated educational trend for a blind public to reflect on a theme considered taboo in this social segment. Therefore, the study is relevant to the scientific knowledge divulged, representing progress in the subject that, in recent years, was object of another study, in which it was tried to make accessible the knowledge about STI for blind people through the validation of educational text ( 11 ) .…”

“…In the case of blind people, the sum of the myths and taboos about sexuality, their inherent vulnerability and the difficulties of access to health services, has repercussions on sexual and reproductive health, in view of exposure to the risk of contracting STIs. In this sense, it is indicated the possibility of occurrence of these infections by the disinformation about the prevention, since the health policies and the preventive campaigns are directed to the visionary public and are not adapted for this social segment, which increases its vulnerability ( 7 , 9 – 11 ) .…”

From words to actions: systematic review of interventions to promote sexual and reproductive health of persons with disabilities in low- and middle-income countries

“…Oliveira et al (2016) conducted a validation study of an information package with content experts reviewing educational materials (a rhyming approach adapted from breast feeding promotion material) on STIs for visually impaired people in Brazil. 31 They reported positive results, with some adaptations needed to ensure accuracy of STI information. Reviewers assessed this study to have a high risk of bias, linked to inadequate sampling technique, unsuitable data collection and analysis methods and interpretation without sufficient detail to convey reliability or rigour.…”