Condom use at last sexual intercourse among unmarried, not living common-law 20- to 34-year-old Canadian young adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
2 The Sex Information and Education Council of Canada (SIECCAN), Toronto ON Abstract: This study utilized data from the Canadian Community Health Surveys (CCHS) to examine condom use among unmarried, not living common-law (UMNCL) Canadians aged 20-34 years. Males (59.9%) were more likely than females (49.9%) to report using a condom at last sexual intercourse. Condom use at last intercourse was more likely among younger respondents aged 20-24 (63.7% males; 53.8% females) than those aged 25-29 (56.0% males; 47.1 females) or 30-34 (54.7% males; 42.2% females). Over a third (35.8%) of those who reported having more than one intercourse partner in the previous 12 months and among those who reported three or four or more partners about 30% of males and nearly 40% of females reported not using a condom at last intercourse. Among all males, the percentage that used a condom at last intercourse was significantly greater than the national average in Prince Edward Island, Ontario, and the territories, and significantly lower in Quebec. Among females, condom use was significantly higher in Ontario and significantly lower in New Brunswick and Quebec. Multivariate analysis indicated that UMNCL females aged 20-34 who lived in rural areas were less likely than their urban counterparts to have used a condom at last intercourse. Those who reported having first intercourse at age 13 or younger were significantly less likely to report using a condom at last intercourse than those whose first intercourse occurred at age 14 or older. Overall, the findings indicate that large numbers of single young adult Canadians are at elevated risk for sexually transmitted infection (STI) including human immunodeficiency virus (HIV).
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".