MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1926365800

Socio-Economic Outcomes of Teen Pregnancy and Parenthood: A Review of the Literature.

2000· review· en· W1926365800 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
M.G. Bissell

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Labor, and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocioeconomic statusDisadvantagedDisadvantagePsychologyPregnancyDevelopmental psychologyTeen pregnancyPopulationDemographySociologyPolitical scienceEconomic growthEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reviews literature examining the socioeconomic consequences of teen pregnancy and child-bearing as well as the birth intentions of teenage women who have become mothers. The literature indicates that women who become teen mothers as compared to women who delay child-bearing past the teen years are more likely to be socioeconomically disadvantaged. However research increasingly suggests that depending on the circumstances of the women in question socioeconomic disadvantage is correlated with but not necessarily a consequence of early child-bearing. In addition the literature suggests that a range of factors including cultural norms and individual needs can impact on the child-rearing decisions of teenage women. It is concluded that policies and programs aimed at reducing teen pregnancy rates and eliminating the negative consequences experienced by teen mothers and their children are unlikely to be fully effective unless they realistically address the socioeconomic inequities faced by many young women in Canada. (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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.069
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations66
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Human SexualitySame topicGender, Labor, and Family DynamicsFrench-language works237,207