A Comparative Study of Interventions for Delaying The Initiation of Sexual Intercourse Among Latino And Black Youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Latino and black adolescents are disproportionately affected by STDs, including HIV, and unintended pregnancies. Few parent-based interventions have targeted these youth, focused on early adolescence and had high participation rates. METHODS: Between 2003 and 2009, a randomized clinical trial was conducted with 2,016 Latino and black mother-adolescent dyads in New York City. Adolescents were eligible if they were in grade 6 or 7. Dyads were assigned to one of three conditions: a parent-based intervention, Families Talking Together (FTT); an adolescent-only intervention, Making a Difference! (MAD); or a combined FTT+MAD intervention. Respondents completed questionnaires at baseline and 12 months later. Single-degree-of-freedom contrasts and logistic regression analysis were used to evaluate differences in outcomes by intervention. RESULTS: The proportion of youth who reported ever having engaged in vaginal intercourse increased over the study period by eight percentage points among those in the MAD group, five points in the FTT group and three points in the combined group; the differences among these increases were not statistically significant. Adolescents in the two FTT groups were significantly more likely than those in the MAD group to indicate that their mother had talked to them about not having intercourse (79% vs. 68%). They also scored higher than youth in the MAD group on measures of communication and perceived maternal attributes, and lower on activities that might lead to risky behaviors. CONCLUSIONS: The proportions of adolescents who initiated intercourse during the study period were not significantly different across groups, implying that the interventions were comparable. Findings suggest that FTT may have led to improved parenting 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 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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".