MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034663044 · doi:10.1080/07399330390178477

A PROCESS MODEL OF DEPO-PROVERA USE IN CANADIAN WOMEN

2003· article· en· W2034663044 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mary Hampton, Barb McWatters

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Care For Women International · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Contraception
Canadian institutionsPlanned Parenthood TorontoUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociocultural evolutionFamily planningMedicineMedroxyprogesterone acetatePsychologyPopulationGynecologyDevelopmental psychologyFamily medicineResearch methodologySociologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated women's experiences with the long-acting, injectable contraceptive Depo-Provera. Fourteen women were interviewed and 57 charts of clients at a Canadian Sexual Health Centre were reviewed to generate a theory of use. A three-stage process model describes women's choice of this contraceptive and decision to continue or discontinue use. This model suggests that women's use of Depo-Provera is determined by a complex interaction of individual cognition, relational processes, and sociocultural contexts.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.382
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Care For Women InternationalSame topicReproductive Health and ContraceptionFrench-language works237,207