Background Parent-child communication about sexuality education is critical for safe adolescent sexual development and well-being. Yet, there is evidence that these conversations are often ineffective. Digital tools have therefore emerged as promising interventions that may assist parents in addressing sensitive or difficult topics. However, our understanding of the factors that may motivate parental adoption of these technologies remains limited. Objective This study aimed to explore factors associated with European parents’ intentions to use a digital tool designed to support parent-child sexual communication and complement school-based sexuality education. The study was conducted across the United Kingdom, Belgium, and Italy. Methods Using the technology acceptance model, we applied str…

Discussion Principal Findings and Comparison With Previous Works This work examined the potential for a hypothetical intergenerational app designed to enhance parent-child sexual communication and align parental efforts with school-based sexuality education. Using a modified TAM, we explored factors that may relate to parents’ intention to use the proposed digital tool. We sampled across 3 distinct regions in an attempt to obtain perspectives of parents across the spectrum of European opinion. Belgium, the United Kingdom, and Italy were selected because they differ in sociopolitical contexts: Belgium has progressive sexuality education policies, the United Kingdom is in an intermediate position, and Italy lacks a national mandate for sexuality education and holds more conservative social norms. These contextual contrasts were mirrored in our descriptive statistics: Italian parents reported higher religiosity and fewer nonheterosexual identities, while parents from Belgium and the United Kingdom were more open to their children having alternative gender and sexual identities. Together, these findings suggest that both sociopolitical climate and demographic composition shaped parents…

The Appreciated Gateway must be evaluated by a human keeper.
Does this declaration represent a genuine open research gap?

FAIL