MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993355566 · doi:10.1016/j.eurpsy.2008.01.1301

Examining parental agreement and compliance with recommendations made by a mental health telephone triage service

2008· article· en· W1993355566 on OpenAlexaff
Cho Hun Ha, Josephine Ho, David Cawthorpe

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Psychiatry · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Contraception
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNational Survey of Family GrowthAbortionOdds ratioOddsMedicaidMedicineMental healthAttendanceLogistic regressionDemographyReproductive healthProtestantismFamily medicineHealth careFamily planningPsychologyPopulationPsychiatryLawSociologyPregnancyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Supreme Court cases challenging the Affordable Care Act (ACA) mandate for employer-provided reproductive health care have focused on religiously based opposition to coverage. Little is known about women's perspectives on such reproductive health policies.Data were drawn from the Women's Health Care Experiences and Preferences survey, a randomly selected, nationally representative sample of 1078 US women aged 18–55 years. We examined associations between religious affiliation and attitudes toward employer-provided insurance coverage of contraception and abortion services as well as the exclusion of religious institutions from this coverage. We used chi-square and multivariable logistic regression for analysis.Respondents self-identified as Baptist (18%), Protestant (Other Mainline, 17%), Catholic (17%), Other Christian (20%), Religious, Non-Christian (7%) or No Affiliation (21%). Religious affiliation was associated with proportions of agreement for contraception (p=.03), abortion (p<.01) and religious exclusion (p<.01) policies. In multivariable models, differences in the odds of agreement varied across religious affiliations and frequency of service attendance. For example, compared to non-affiliated women, Baptists and Other Nondenominational Christians (but not Catholics) had lower odds of agreement with employer coverage of contraception (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.4–0.1 and OR 0.57, CI 0.4–0.9, respectively); women who attended services weekly or more than weekly had lower odds of agreement (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.3–0.8 and OR 0.33, CI 0.2–0.6, respectively), compared to less frequent attenders.Recent religiously motivated legal challenges to employer-provided reproductive health care coverage may not represent the attitudes of many religious women.Recent challenges to the ACA contraceptive mandate appear to equate religious belief with opposition to employer-sponsored reproductive health coverage, but women's views are more complex.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.062
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.062
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean PsychiatrySame topicReproductive Health and ContraceptionFrench-language works237,207