MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005652358 · doi:10.1515/ijamh.2002.14.2.97

Reducing the rate of teen pregnancy in Canada: A framework for action

2002· article· en· W2005652358 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dianne Rogers, Kelli Dilworth

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute of Child Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneral partnershipDocumentationFriendshipCall to actionMedical educationFocus groupScope (computer science)Action (physics)PostponementPublic relationsPsychologyMedicinePolitical scienceSociologyBusinessSocial psychologyComputer scienceAdvertisingLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In partnership with the Young/Single Parent Support Network of Ottawa-Carleton and Timmin's Native Friendship Centre, the Canadian Institute of Child Health has completed a framework to reduce the rate of teen pregnancy in Canada. The final document is called Pro-Action, Postponement, and Preparation/Support: A Framework for Action to Reduce the Rate of Teen Pregnancy in Canada. The objectives were to learn what is currently being done and what needs to be done on this issue across the country, and to explore the potential role of projects funded by the federal Canada Action Program for Children (CAPC) and Canada Prenatal Nutrition Program (CPNP) in reducing the rate of teen pregnancy. Being an extremely complex and sensitive issue, the report was a culmination of a number of research methods: over 40 key informants from diverse backgrounds and expertise were interviewed to determine the scope of the problem and potential solutions; a detailed literature review identified existing date and documentation on the topic, using both Canadian and international studies; youth surveys and focus groups were conducted in both on-reserve Aboriginal communities and non-Aboriginal communities.

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)0.048
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.210
Threshold uncertainty score0.916

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0480.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0080.006
Science and technology studies0.0300.023
Scholarly communication0.0170.006
Open science0.0100.016
Research integrity0.0140.017
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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Adolescent Medicine and HealthSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207