Parental perception and practices relating to parent-child communication on sexuality in Lagos, Nigeria.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed at contributing to the promotion of positive communication between parents and children in order to help the children establish individual values and make sexually healthy decisions. Materials and method: Ninety six out of 300 in-school adolescents previously interviewed were selected for follow-up interview with their respective parents/guardians using a simple random sampling technique. Semi-structured questionnaires were administered on the parents/guardians after obtaining their informed consents. Results: Of the 93 respondents that freely discuss with their children, the frequencies were: regularly (68.8%); occasionally (28.0%); and (3.2%) could not recall. More of those that discussed about sexuality issues were younger with a mean age of 45.5 years compared to 48.3 years for those who did not (χ2 = 40.91, df = 50, p < 0.05). Similarly, younger respondents perceived sexuality education more important than older respondents (χ2= 61.81, df = 75, p < 0.05). Very few discussed HIV/AIDS with their male children while none had such discussion with their female children. About one-quarter of the parents did not believe in children knowing about contraceptives, stating that such exposure is unnecessary because it will initiate the children into early sexual activities. This communication gap was more evident when about one-third of the respondents insisted they will not counsel their children about contraceptives. Conclusions: Parents should be assisted in developing specific knowledge and skills to support their adolescents’ sexual decision making. Intervention programs should target particularly the older ones, who are usually not too comfortable in discussing issues relating to sexuality with their children.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".