Adolescents’ Willingness to Use the Contraceptive Vaginal Ring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess adolescents' attitudes towards the contraceptive vaginal ring (CVR). We also aimed to identify the factors associated with their willingness to use it. METHODS: We conducted a descriptive cross-sectional study. Fifty-nine female volunteers, aged 14 to 18 years, were recruited in a clinical setting. The participants completed a self-administered questionnaire collecting information on sexual and contraceptive history as well as personal and demographic data. After reading information describing the CVR, they were asked about their perceptions of and willingness to adopt this contraceptive method. We used a logistic regression model to assess factors associated with their willingness to use the CVR. RESULTS: Our population was mostly composed of coitally experienced (86%), high school level (71%) adolescents living with their parents (97%). Only a minority (17%) were willing to use the CVR, while 39% remained undecided. Participants were concerned about experiencing vaginal discomfort and difficulty in inserting or removing the ring. They also feared that it would interfere with their sexual activities or cause urinary tract infections, leukorrhea, or vaginitis. Willingness to adopt the CVR increased with the number of contraceptive methods already used (OR = 1.92; P = 0.015) and was not associated with a lack of contraceptive compliance. CONCLUSIONS: A minority of adolescents are willing to use the CVR, but many are ambivalent. Health care professionals should focus on addressing concerns about vaginal insertion. Adolescents who tend to be the most interested in the CVR are those who have experience with a greater number of contraceptives.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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".