The Perception of South African Adolescents Regarding Primary Health Care Services
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most of the South African public health facilities fail to provide adolescent-friendly health services. A quantitative, descriptive research study was conducted at Stinkwater, a rural area in Hammanskraal, South Africa. The objective of the study was to describe the adolescent's preferences regarding primary health care services. A survey was conducted among 119 adolescents. It was found that adolescents wished to be involved in the planning of the activities of the adolescent health service, and that friendliness and respect for adolescents were seen as desirable characteristics of an adolescent-friendly health care service. Adolescents preferred services to be available throughout the week and to be located at the school, youth center, community center, hospital, or clinic. Health education was indicated as a priority and the health care team should include different members of a multidisciplinary team. Adolescents preferred that their health services be separated from adult services and that a male nurse be employed in the adolescent service in order to create a less feminine image. It was also recommended that all adolescents be educated about the types of services available. Understanding health care service preferences of adolescents is needed in order to deliver optimal health care to this group.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".