MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2233138339 · doi:10.18584/iipj.2013.4.1.3

Teenage Pregnancy and Parenthood Perspectives of First Nation Women

2013· article· en· W2233138339 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Rachel Eni, Wanda Phillips-Beck

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Indigenous Policy Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousSocioeconomic statusStorytellingTeenage pregnancyQualitative researchGender studiesPsychologyDevelopmental psychologySociologyPopulationNarrativeSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper summarizes a study that explored perspectives of Manitoba First Nation women on teenage pregnancy and parenthood. Data was derived through a qualitative methodology focusing on a life storytelling approach within a culturally informed framework and setting. The two main objectives of the study were to: (a) elucidate community perspectives on teenage pregnancy and parenting, and (b) understand their psychological, cultural, and socioeconomic causes and implications. The study was designed in consultation with staff and participants of the Manitoba First Nation Strengthening Families Maternal Child Health Program (SF-MCH). Through the storytelling technique, the women were able to practice or "work out" the unfolding of their personal relationships, past and present. Themes arose from the data that shed light upon women’s personal relationship experiences, meanings they ascribe to them, values, and aspirations for the future. The study included a participant engagement in policy development activity that had the women consider types of policies and programs to better support youth in First Nation communities.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.512
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Indigenous Policy JournalSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207