Online Discussions With Pregnant and Parenting Adolescents: Perspectives and Possibilities
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Internet is an innovative strategy to increase public participation. It is important to include pregnant and parenting teens' perspectives when planning programs to meet their needs. This qualitative study explored online discussions as a strategy to enhance participation by this population. Findings showed that online communication was preferred over face-to-face group discussions. Being anonymous online encouraged open and honest feedback. Participants experienced various forms of social support, however, there was an overall lack of teen involvement online. Strategies to engage adolescents in online discussions and reduce barriers are discussed. Strategies included the use of teen moderators, home computer access, technical support, and engagement in naturally flowing online discussions to meet social support needs. Blending researchers' with teens' needs for social support in an online environment is encouraged. With careful planning and design, online communications can result in mutual benefits for researchers, service providers, and pregnant and parenting adolescents.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 it