Young Native American Men and Their Intention to Use Family Planning Services
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the extent to which age, fatherhood, relationship status, self-control of birth control method, and the use of birth control influence young Native American men's intention to use family planning services. Data were collected for this study during in-depth interviews with 112 Native American men between the ages of 18 and 24 years. The mean age reported was 21. Thirty-eight percent of the young men reported having children. Almost 70% of the young men reported being in a steady relationship. Eighty-eight percent reported that it was very important that they have self-control of the type of birth control that they use. In addition, 88% of the young men reported that they would use some type of birth control within the next year to prevent a pregnancy with their partner. Logistic regression analysis indicated that as age increased, young men were less likely to seek family planning services for birth control. The young men who reported being fathers were more likely than the young men who did not report being fathers to seek family planning services for birth control. Findings from this study suggest that public health efforts to educate Native American men about family planning services are most effective in their adolescence, before they transition into young adulthood. Fatherhood may also be considered a protective factor that may increase the likelihood that young Native American men will seek family planning services for birth control. Public health efforts that address reproductive health among young Native American men may be effective with Native American men in adolescence, prior to their transition to young adulthood. Family planning services that provide outreach education and care to Native American fathers may also be effective.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".