Interventions Intended to Reduce Pregnancy‐Related Outcomes Among Adolescents
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This Campbell systematic review examines the effectiveness of teenage pregnancy prevention programs in promoting abstinence, encouraging the use of contraception and reducing the likelihood of pregnancy among teens. A thorough literature search was conducted up to April 2006. The review summarises findings from 31 studies which included 37,000 youth conducted in the US or in developed countries with higher than average rates of unplanned teen pregnancy, such as Canada, England, New Zealand, and Australia. This review finds no consistent evidence that the types of pregnancy prevention programs evaluated rigorously to date will alter in intended ways the sexual activity or pregnancy risks of youth. However, this overall pooling of studies mixes results of different program types serving different populations of adolescents. This review highlights the relative dearth of evidence to judge the overall effectiveness of particular intervention strategies. For this reason, further research and evaluation is necessary, including studying programs that have not yet been evaluated rigorously and programs that have been replicated and are serving new populations of adolescents in different communities.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.008 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it