MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074469002 · doi:10.2105/ajph.2005.074609

Growth Trajectories of Sexual Risk Behavior in Adolescence and Young Adulthood

2007· article· en· W2074469002 on OpenAlexaff
Stevenson Fergus, Marc A. Zimmerman, Cleopatra H. Caldwell

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Public Health · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNational Institute on Drug Abuse
KeywordsYoung adultEthnic groupDemographyPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyLongitudinal studySexual behaviorMultilevel modelAfrican americanMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Adolescence and young adulthood (ages 18-25 years) are periods of development and change, which include experimentation with and adoption of new roles and behaviors. We investigated longitudinal trajectories of sexual risk behaviors across these time periods and how these trajectories may be different for varying demographic groups. METHODS: We developed multilevel growth models of sexual risk behavior for a predominantly African American sample (n=847) that was followed for 8 years, from adolescence to young adulthood. We investigated differences in growth parameters by race/ethnicity and gender and their interactions. RESULTS: The final model included linear and quadratic terms for both adolescence and young adulthood, indicating acceleration of sexual risk behaviors during adolescence and a peak and deceleration during young adulthood. African American males exhibited the highest rate of sexual risk behavior in ninth grade, yet had the slowest rate of growth. Compared with their White peers, African American males and females exhibited less sexual risk behavior during young adulthood. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that youths of different races/ethnicities and genders exhibit varying sexual risk behavior trajectories.

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)0.003
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.343 · 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

Citations165
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Public HealthSame topicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive HealthFrench-language works237,207