Interaction with health professionals and change in Canadian adolescents' social support perceptions from the prenatal to the postnatal period
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For pregnant adolescents, the availability of support from others may be important to how they simultaneously navigate the challenges presented by adolescent psychosocial development and the transition to motherhood. This support from others is generally encompassed under the construct of social support. The purpose of this cross-sectional, exploratory study was to determine if Canadian adolescents perceive adequate social support to be available in the prenatal and postpartum periods and whether or not select contact with health professionals influences perceived availability of social support over time. Specifically, the effects of adolescents’’ timing of initiation of prenatal care, prenatal class attendance, postpartum contact with a healthcare provider, and timing of postnatal contact with a healthcare provider were explored. Using data collected from the Canadian Maternity Experiences Survey (CMES), the sample consisted of 297 Canadian adolescent mothers, weighted to represent 2.262. Results indicated that the majority of Canadian adolescents perceived adequate social support to be available both in the prenatal and postpartum period, however, perceptions of availability of support changed for some participants from the prenatal to the postpartum period. Bivariate logistic regression analyses found that adolescents reporting postpartum contact with a healthcare provider were 5.23 times more likely to perceive a decrease in social support perceptions between the prenatal and postnatal period [OR = 5.23, 95% CI (1.6, 17.14), p = .006], while other variables explored showed little or no effect. Implications of these results for nursing practice, education, and research are discussed. \n
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".