Attitude change in a human sexuality course that de-emphasizes small group activities

Abstract

The attitudes of second-year medical students were measured to determine if positive attitude changes could be obtained in a human sexuality course that de-emphasized small group activities. Students were given a semantic differential instrument and were asked to rate four concepts related to human sexuality: (a) my sexuality, (b) masturbation, (c) homosexuality, and (d) my role in understanding sexual problems. Significant changes in student attitudes were reported at the 0x05 level for the concept, my sexuality; at the 0x01 level for the concept, my role in understanding sexual problems; and at the 0x001 level for the concepts, homosexuality and masturbation. Females had more positive attitudes (P < 0x001), pre and post, towards homosexuality than did males. No significant differences were found between married and single students.

Medical students’ attitudes towards peer physical examination: findings from an international cross-sectional and longitudinal study

“…their cynicism increases) (Woloschuk et al 2004), others have discussed students' attitude changes towards specific teaching interventions. While medical students develop more positive attitudes after teaching in sexuality, psychiatry and substance abuse (Chappel and Veach 1987;Maurice et al 1975;Thomas et al 1980), they develop more negative attitudes towards computerbased learning as a result of exposure to this method of teaching (Hahne et al 2005). Furthermore, Rees and Sheard (2003) found that although students' positive attitudes towards communication skills declined from the beginning to the end of their communication skills course, their negative attitudes towards learning communication skills did not appear to differ significantly from the first to the second questionnaire completion.…”

The effects of educational curricula and training on LGBT‐specific health issues for healthcare students and professionals: a mixed‐method systematic review

“…Five studies presented data from healthcare service providers [ 29 – 33 ]: medical residents [ 29 – 31 ], practicing nurses [ 33 ] and one had a mixture of clinicians, nurses, counsellors and administrators [ 32 ]. Almost all studies took place in high-income western countries: 12 in the USA [ 19 , 20 , 22 – 24 , 26 – 31 , 33 ], 2 United Kingdom [ 21 , 25 ] and 1 in Kenya between 1977 and 2015. The Kenyan study used a mixed-method study design but published the quantitative and qualitative results separately [ 32 , 34 ].…”

“…For intervention studies without control, five were graded as low risk of bias [ 23 , 28 – 30 , 32 ], five as moderate risk [ 20 , 24 , 27 , 31 , 33 ] and two as high risk [ 25 , 26 ]. The articles did not provide enough information on the population included in the study, characteristics of subjects lost to follow-up and estimates of random variability for the main outcome.…”

Caring for Sexual and Gender Minority Patients: What Factors Explain Self-Reported Competence among Health Care Professional Students?

“…The GAPS is a 30-item scale designed to measure health practitioners' beliefs and behaviors regarding care of gay and lesbian individuals. The instrument uses a 5-point Likert scale from strongly agree (5) to strongly disagree (1) for items 1-15 and from always (5) to never (1) for items [16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30]. The directionality and scoring for items were retained from the original instrument with the neutral answer option shifted to the far right to allow for a genuine non-response option as with the prior two scales.…”

“…[4][5][6][7][8] Past studies have suggested that more SGM-speci c health training, 5,9,10 personal and professional experiences with SGM people, [11][12][13][14] and certain sociodemographic factors are associated with increased clinician competence in caring for SGM patients. [15][16] Speci cally, identifying as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer (LGBTQ); female sex-assigned-at-birth; [17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26] liberal political a liation; 21,22,27 less religiosity; 9,14,22,28 and less spirituality 29 have predicted more a rming attitudes toward SGM people. Also, younger age, 10 white (versus non-white) race, 18,20,26 and less conservative religion, 9,21,30 have predicted less bias toward SGM people in past samples.…”