DEVELOPMENTAL ASSETS AND SEXUAL AND REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH AMONG 10- TO 14-YEAR-OLDS IN NORTHERN UGANDA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a need for research on adolescent sexual and reproductive health (SRH) to further clarify the broader developmental context of very young adolescents who are generally neglected in SRH research in developing countries. Programs can then address these factors: (including quality of family, school, and peer relationships, commitment to learning, and various social competencies), thereby broadening valid intervention targets and increasing program effectiveness among vulnerable youth. In this study, cross-sectional survey data measured the extent of developmental assets (youths’ individual strengths and social relationships and opportunities) and concurrent SRH outcomes among a stratified random sample of 941 very young adolescents (10 to14 years old) in northern Uganda. We hypothesized that youth with higher levels of assets would have better SRH. Mean developmental assets level was barely adequate. However, as predicted, youths with higher levels of the assets were more likely to have accurate HIV knowledge, accurate condom knowledge, the ability to access SRH services, supportive relationships in which SRH issues can be discussed, and were more likely to have the intention of delaying sexual intercourse or using condoms. The asset–SRH health linkage was stronger for girls than for boys. The findings suggest a potential utility for promoting individual and social assets, such as positive relationships and opportunities, commitments to learning, and social competencies, as a strategy for promoting SRH among very young adolescents in a developing country setting.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".