Association between Self-Reported Academic Performance and Risky Sexual Behavior among Ugandan University Students- A Cross Sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Little is known about the association between self-reported academic performance and risky sexual behaviors and if this differs by gender, among university students. Academic performance can create psychological pressure in young students. Poor academic performance might thus potentially contribute to risky sexual behavior among university students. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between self-reported academic performance and risky sexual behaviors, and whether gender affects this relationship among Ugandan university students. In 2010, 1,954 students participated in a cross-sectional survey, conducted at Mbarara University of Science and Technology in southwestern Uganda (72% response rate). Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used for the analysis. 1,179 (60.3%) students in our study sample reported having debuted sexually. Of these 440 (42.2%) used condoms inconsistently with new sexual partners, and 344 (33.6%) had had multiple sexual partners. We found a statistically significant association between poor academic performance and inconsistent condom use with a new sex partner and this association remained significant even after adjusting for all the potential confounders. There was no such association detected regarding multiple sexual partners. We also found that gender modified the effect of poor academic performance on inconsistent condom use. Females, who were poor academic performers, were found to be at a higher risk of inconsistent condom use than their male counterparts. Interventions should be designed to provide extra support to poor academic performers, which may improve their performance and self-esteem, which in turn might reduce their risky sexual behaviors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".