ArticleSexual medicine2026
Translation, cross-cultural adaptation of longitudinal curriculum objectives in sexual health to Brazilian medical education.
Article in Sexual medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The absence of a structured framework for sexual health education in undergraduate medical training contributes to fragmented teaching and insufficient preparation of future physicians. Aim: To translate, cross-culturally adapt and implement the Longitudinal Sexual Health Curricular Objectives for Undergraduate Medical Education instrument for the Brazilian Portuguese context. Methods: This descriptive, cross-sectional methodological study followed established international guidelines for translation and cross-cultural adaptation (Beaton methodology). The process included forward translation by two independent bilingual physicians, synthesis into a single version (T12), back-translation by independent native English translators blinded to the original instrument, expert committee review, and pretesting. A multidisciplinary expert panel ( Outcomes: Primary outcomes were content validity (CVI) and clarity/comprehensibility of the adapted instrument; secondary outcomes included feasibility of curricular implementation. Results: The final Brazilian Portuguese version demonstrated excellent content validity, with an overall CVI of 0.97. Most items were rated as fully representative by the expert panel, with minor terminological and conceptual adjustments to ensure cultural appropriateness. During pretesting, 14 of 30 (46.6%) of items raised some interpretative doubts; following consensus review, 8 of 14 these items were revised to improve clarity. Faculty feedback confirmed overall comprehensibility and acceptability. Curricular mapping demonstrated feasibility of longitudinal integration without the need for stand-alone courses, distributing competency-based sexual health curriculum objectives progressively across the first three years of training. Clinical Implications: The adapted instrument provides a structured framework to guide competency-based integration of sexual health education into undergraduate medical curricula. Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include a rigorous methodological adaptation process, high content validity, multidisciplinary expert evaluation, and practical curricular implementation. Limitations include the absence of evaluation of student learning outcomes or long-term educational impact. Conclusion: The Brazilian Portuguese version of the Longitudinal Sexual Health Curricular Objectives instrument is valid and feasible for implementation, supporting structured, longitudinal, and competency-based sexual health education in medical training.
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.