Knowledge and attitudes of Latin American gynecologists regarding unplanned pregnancy and use of combined oral contraceptives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Unintended pregnancy is a public health problem and unmet medical need worldwide. It is estimated that in the year 2012, almost 213 million pregnancies occurred, and the global pregnancy rate decreased only slightly from 2008 to 2012. It was also estimated that 85 million pregnancies (40% of all pregnancies) were unintended and that 38% ended in an unintended birth. OBJECTIVES: To assess knowledge and attitudes of Latin American (LA) obstetricians and gynecologists (OBGYNs) regarding unintended pregnancies and aspects of combined oral contraceptive (COC) use. METHODS: A survey was conducted during a scientific meeting about contraception in 2014, in which OBGYNs from 12 LA countries who provide attention in contraception were invited to respond to a multiple-choice questionnaire to assess their knowledge and attitudes regarding unplanned pregnancy and some aspects regarding COC use. RESULTS: A total of 210 OBGYNs participated in the study. Their knowledge regarding COC failure was low. The participants reported they believed that their patients habitually forgot to take a pill and that their patients did not know what to do in these situations. They were aware of the benefits of COC use; however, they were less prone to prescribe COCs for the purpose of protecting against ovarian and endometrial cancer, and one-quarter of them had doubts about the association between COC use and cancer risk. CONCLUSION: The interviewed LA OBGYNs showed some flaws in terms of knowledge of COC failure rates and the non-contraceptive benefits and risks of COCs. To adequately counsel their patients regarding COC intake, OBGYNs must be updated regarding all aspects of COC use.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".