Sexual health among female Aboriginal university students in the Maritime Provinces of Canada: risk behaviours and health services use
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Background Young Aboriginal Canadian people are at increased risk of negative sexual health outcomes, including sexually transmissible infections (STIs) and unplanned pregnancy. Associations between Aboriginal ethnicity and sexual risk behaviours and related health services use among sexually active female university students in eastern Canada were examined. METHODS: A secondary analysis of online survey data collected from sexually active female university students under age 30 years from eight post-secondary institutions in the Maritime Provinces of Canada was carried out (N=5010). Students were asked about their ethnic backgrounds, health services use and sexual health behaviours. Logistic regressions were used to compare Aboriginal students to Caucasian students regarding their sexual health behaviours and services use. RESULTS: In adjusted analyses, Aboriginal students were seen to be more likely to not have used a condom (OR 2.37; 95% CI 1.34-4.18) or any form of effective contraception (OR 3.05; 95% CI 1.75-5.31) at last intercourse. They also were more likely to report any lifetime testing for pregnancy (OR 5.81; 95% CI 3.07-10.99) and STIs (OR 2.95; 95% CI 1.11-7.82). Aboriginal students accessed university health services as often as their Caucasian counterparts. CONCLUSIONS: Aboriginal women attending university in the Maritime Provinces of Canada engage in greater sexual risk taking than Caucasian women and report more related testing. Health services providers working with university students should be aware of these lower rates of barrier protection and use of contraception among Aboriginal women, and use healthcare visits as opportunities to engage these women in reducing their sexual risk taking.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".