Association between Family Environment and Sexual Behaviour of Adolescents in Burkina Faso
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies conducted in Africa have demonstrated the existence of a significant association between family environment and the sexual behaviour of adolescents. Generally, empirical studies of this topic are based on parental control, and family or conjugal instability and socialization approaches. The objective of this study is to assess the association between family environment and the sexual behaviour of adolescents aged 12 to 19 years. The 2004 National Survey of Adolescents (NSA) in Burkina Faso provides data for studying operationalization. Analyses were bivariate and multivariate. The former were conducted using cross tabulations while the latter used three logistic regression models. Results indicate a significant but low association among family environment variables. Absence of both parents, or a number of individuals under 20 years old higher than the number of adults in a household is not systematically associated with risky sexual behaviour. Parental control was shown to be more discriminating of sexual behaviour of adolescents from Burkina Faso, compared with communication with family members regarding sexuality. Despite current ongoing economic crises and sociocultural mutations in Burkinabe societies, household members and family still play major roles in adolescents’ education. Results reinforce sexual and reproductive health programs where parents and household members are central to strategies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".