ArticleJMIR formative research2025
A Digital Pornography Education Prototype Co-Designed With Young People: Formative Evaluation.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Breaking the Barrier: A Content Analysis of Condom Use Behaviors in Popular Online Pornography.Archives of sexual behavior · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Interventions to help young people make sense of sex and relationships in the context of widely available pornography are becoming increasingly supported in school settings. However, young people who experience disruptions to their education often have less access to such programs. Digital platforms may offer a more accessible method to deliver tailored sexual health and pornography literacy to young people who are disengaged from mainstream schooling, or who experience other types of structural disadvantage. Objective: This study aimed to describe the formative evaluation of "The Gist" a co-designed online sexual health education and pornography literacy prototype designed to meet the sexual health information needs of structurally marginalized young people in Australia. Methods: We conducted iterative workshops with 33 young people aged between 15 and 24 years recruited from an alternative education school in Melbourne, Australia. Through interactive activities, participants evaluated the overall prototype design, including its usability, desirability, inclusiveness, and potential for impact. Results: Participants reported The Gist to be easy to use (17/20, 85%) and safe (19/23, 83%), with "hot" branding (25/30, 83%). However, perceived content relevance was dependent on the participants' existing level of sexual health knowledge and experience, with only 31% (7/23) agreeing that "The Gist feels like it was made for me." The interactive learning activities such as the debunked (myth-busting) and quiz features were among the most used and well-liked on The Gist platform. Low unprompted engagement with the prototype outside of facilitated workshop settings also confirmed previous researcher postulations that The Gist as a standalone digital platform is unlikely to meet the needs of this population group. Further design refinements are needed to improve user experience, including more interactive activities and visual information in place of heavily text-based features. Conclusions: This study provides important insights into the design and sexual health information needs of structurally marginalized young people. Further research is needed to assess the overall efficacy of The Gist prototype, as well as its ability to positively influence young people's sexual attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors. Future iterations should consider hybrid or face-to-face delivery models to better capture student engagement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.