Predictors of adolescent health care utilization
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study, using Andersen's health care utilization model, examined how predisposing characteristics, enabling resources, need, personal health practices, and psychological factors influence health care utilization using a nationally representative, longitudinal sample of Canadian adolescents. Second, this study examined whether this process varies across physicians, non-physicians, and dentists. The results indicate that need and psychological factors were strong determinants of utilization. Predisposing factors were associated with utilization, although there were few enabling resources. Differences were found for utilization of different services. Females, adolescents who were older, from single parent families, with lower self-rated health, lower health status, higher disability, higher distress and involved in health compromizing practices were more likely to visit physicians and non-physicians. Higher dentist utilization was related to higher income, single parent status, being younger, having lower health status, and higher disability. Predisposing and enabling factors were not mediators of utilization. The findings suggest that health care providers could be an important source of counselling on psychological, lifestyle issues, and physical concerns.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it