Adult Couples Facing a Planned or an Unplanned Pregnancy
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
This study examined demographic, individual, and relational factors that differentiate adult couples facing an unplanned pregnancy carried to term from those facing a planned pregnancy. One hundred and eighteen couples expecting their first child completed, along with a demographic questionnaire, measures of personality, perceived stress, depression, attachment, and dyadic adjustment during the third trimester of the women’s pregnancy. Results showed that demographic risk factors for unplanned births included age, education level, annual income, length of relationship, and marital status. In addition, high levels of neuroticism, depression, and perceived stress, and low levels of agreeableness and conscientiousness were individual factors associated with unplanned pregnancies among pregnant women. Relational factors associated with unplanned pregnancies included low levels of secure attachment and high levels of anxious-ambivalent and avoidant attachment in men and women. The findings clearly suggest that the psychosocial environment of couples with unplanned pregnancies is problematic.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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