What are the characteristics of ‘sexually ready’ adolescents? Exploring the sexual readiness of youth in urban poor Accra
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Adolescent sexual activity, especially among the urban poor, remains a challenge. Despite numerous interventions and programs to address the negative consequences arising from early and frequent sexual activity among youth in sub-Saharan Africa, including Ghana, only slight progress has been made. A plausible explanation is that our understanding of what adolescents think about sex and about their own sexuality is poor. In that sense, examining how adolescents in urban poor communities think about their sexual readiness, and identifying characteristics associated with that sexual self-concept dimension, should deepen our understanding of this topical issue. METHODS: A total of 196 male and female adolescents, ages 12 to 19, were surveyed in the 2011 RIPS Urban Health and Poverty Project in Accra, Ghana. The youth responded to three statements which determined their levels of sexual readiness. Other background characteristics were also obtained enabling the assessment of the correlates of their preparedness to engage in sex. The data were analyzed using ordered logistic regression models. RESULTS: Overall, the majority of respondents did not consider themselves ready for sex. Multivariate analyses indicated that sexual experience, exposure to pornographic movies, gender, ethnicity and household wealth were significantly linked to their readiness for sex. CONCLUSION: Sexual readiness is related to sexual activity as well as other characteristics of the adolescents, suggesting the need to consider these factors in the design of programs and interventions to curb early sex. The subject of sexual readiness has to be investigated further to ensure adolescents do not identify with any negative effects of this sexual self-view.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".