MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Planejamento familiar: uso dos serviços de saúde por jovens com experiência de gravidez

2014· article· pt· W2028916905 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Laís Norberta Bezerra de Moura, Keila Rejane Oliveira Gomes

Bibliographic record

VenueCiência & Saúde Coletiva · 2014
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFamily planningPregnancyYoung adultMedicineResidenceReproductive healthQuarter (Canadian coin)PsychologyFamily medicinePopulationGerontologyDemographyNursingEnvironmental healthSociologyResearch methodologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The scope of this paper was to analyze the use of family planning services by young women with experience of pregnancy. It involves a cross-sectional study conducted with 464 young women who completed a pregnancy in the first quarter of 2006 in six hospitals in Teresina, when they were between 15 and 19 years of age. Data were collected in 2008 through a pre-coded and pre-tested form. Multivariate analysis showed that young women with lower income and a higher number of pregnancies, for whom health professionals, family and partner were their source of information, and who used contraception in their last sexual relations, were more likely to be users of family planning services. Approximately 55% of young women said they would seek a specialized service for their age group, even if it was far from their residence. It was revealed that there is a need for investments in a specialized service with inherent characteristics that facilitate early access for young women, and also address the concerns of the young women who, despite having experienced an adolescent pregnancy, do not use the available family planning services.

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)0.006
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.317 · 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

Citations20
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCiência & Saúde ColetivaSame topicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive HealthFrench-language works237,207