Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This article profiles Canadian women aged 15 to 49 who use oral contraceptives (OCs), and compares certain of their characteristics with those of non-users. It also examines associations between OC use and selected characteristics, including cardiovascular risk factors. DATA SOURCE: The data are from the cross-sectional household component of Statistics Canada's 1996/97 National Population Health Survey. The analysis is based on a sample of 21,996 women aged 15 to 49, weighted to represent an estimated 7.6 million women. ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUES: Cross-tabulations were used to estimate the percentage of women aged 15 to 49 who use OCs and to compare selected health behaviours of users and non-users. A multiple logistic regression model was used to model relationships between selected characteristics and OC use. MAIN RESULTS: An estimated 1.3 million women aged 15 to 49, or 18%, reported using OCs in 1996/97. OC use was significantly associated with being young, unmarried, sexually active, and having prescription drug insurance and relatively high education. About one-third of OC users also smoked.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.116 | 0.024 |
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".