Biobehavioural and Cognitive Determinants of Adolescent Girls' Involvement in Sexual Risk Behaviours: A Test of Three Theoretical Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The observed increase in teenage pregnancy rates and sexually transmitted infection (STI) in adolescents in Quebec indicates a need to examine causes and prevention of sexual risk behaviours in this age group. This study uses two theoretical frameworks (the Theory of Reasoned Action and Problem Behavior Theory) combined with the basic framework of the Theory of Reproductive Development of identify variables predicting two specific behaviours related to teen pregnancy and reproductive health: (1) age at first intercourse and (2) consistency of condom use. Two cohorts of girls (N = 407 aged 12 to 17 years) were included in three specific periods of data collection from 1995 to 1997. Sequential Logistic Regression Analyses were performed to test the two theoretical frameworks separately for each outcome. The results show that age at first sexual intercourse and the consistency of condom use are predicted by different sets of variables suggesting that these behaviours may have different meanings and/or importance for adolescents. The Theory of Reasoned Action combined model appears to be a better predictor of the two target behaviours. (authors)
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 | 0.007 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".