MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118209815 · doi:10.1177/0017896912444181

Evaluation of <i>Harsh Reality</i> : A sexual health print-based resource for street-involved youth

2012· article· en· W2118209815 on OpenAlexaffabout
Chelsea Jalloh, Barbara McMillan, Margaret Ormond, Catherine Casey, John Wylie

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Education Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFocus Groups and Qualitative Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFocus groupResource (disambiguation)Resource distributionPopulationQualitative propertyQualitative researchPsychologyMedicineApplied psychologyEnvironmental healthSociologyComputer scienceBusinessResource allocationMarketingSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Street-involved youth are one of the populations most at risk for elevated rates of sexually transmitted and bloodborne infections. This paper evaluates the suitability and success of a resource focused on health education with a population of street-involved youth in Winnipeg, Canada. Method: Using a mixed method approach, quantitative and qualitative data were collected and analysed. Surveys involving both structured and semi-structured questions were administered orally to 100 participants. Three gender-stratified focus groups (total of 23 participants) were also conducted. Focus groups were recorded and subsequently transcribed. Empirical data was used to calculate frequency distributions, supported by a general inductive analysis of qualitative data. Results: From the interview and focus group data, the majority of participants had a very positive perception of the resource. However, in terms of specific knowledge uptake, participants displayed a lack of recall of the specific items measured in the evaluation, such as local HIV testing facilities, types of HIV tests available and specific information pertaining to recent research conducted in Manitoba with street-involved populations. Conclusion: Both passive distribution of the resource through service-providing institutions and active distribution in the street were effective approaches for exposing a wide range of street-involved youth to the resource. Poor recall of specific knowledge objectives suggests alternate methods of presenting key fact-based information are necessary to increase resource efficiency. Articles must be created at an appropriate reading level for the street-involved population to improve reader engagement. The ability for the target population to identify that the resource is grounded in language, art, interests and lived-experiences of the street-involved youth was well-received and facilitated interest in looking through the resource and credibility of information.

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)0.066
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.697
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0660.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.438
GPT teacher head0.552
Teacher spread0.114 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Education JournalSame topicFocus Groups and Qualitative MethodsFrench-language works237,207