MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108294872

Emergency contraception: knowledge and attitudes of Nova Scotian family physicians.

2012· article· en· W2108294872 on OpenAlexaffabout
Donald B. Langille, Michael Allen, Anne Marie Whelan

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Contraception
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNova scotiaEmergency contraceptionMedical prescriptionFamily medicineSampling frameFamily planningPsychologyMedicinePopulationGeographyNursingEnvironmental healthResearch methodology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine the extent to which Nova Scotian FPs prescribe and provide emergency contraceptive pills (ECPs) and to explore their knowledge of and attitudes toward ECPs. DESIGN: Survey of Nova Scotian FPs using a modified Dillman method. SETTING: All regions of Nova Scotia. PARTICIPANTS: Family physicians registered with Dalhousie University's Division of Continuing Medical Education. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Sex differences in the provision of ECPs and knowledge and attitudes about the ECP Plan B. RESULTS: Of 913 eligible FPs, 155 (17.0%) participated in the survey. Respondents resembled the sampling frame closely. Most physicians (64.0%) had prescribed ECPs in the previous year (mean number of prescriptions, 4.92); only 12.9% provided ECPs in advance of need. Knowledge about Plan B was quite good, except for knowledge of the time frame for potential effectiveness; only 29.2% of respondents answered that question correctly. Respondents generally supported nonprescription availability of ECPs, but 25.0% of FPs were concerned that this could lead to less use of more effective methods of contraception, and 39.2% believed that it would encourage repeat use. Younger FPs provided ECPs more often than their older colleagues, while female respondents had better knowledge about Plan B. In multivariate analysis being younger than 40 years was marginally associated with prescribing Plan B and with prescribing any form of ECP. CONCLUSION: Most Nova Scotian FPs provided ECPs and had generally good knowledge about and attitudes toward providing such contraception without prescription. However, FPs were poorly informed about the length of time that Plan B can be effective, which could potentially affect use when patients consult several days after unprotected sex. There were some concerns about nonprescription availability of ECPs, which could have implications for recommending it to patients. Rarely were ECPs prescribed for advance use, which might represent a lost prevention opportunity, especially for adolescents who often do not use effective contraception.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.500
Threshold uncertainty score0.345

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations6
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicReproductive Health and ContraceptionFrench-language works237,207