Factors Related to Community Mobilization and Continued Involvement in a Community-Based Effort To Enhance Adolescents' Sexual Behaviour
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: This article describes and proposes a model of the factors that influenced community members' initial mobilization, continuing effort, or lack of involvement in a community based-intervention on adolescents' sexual health in Nova Scotia, Canada. Design: This study was conducted within the constructivist paradigm and guided by the principles of grounded theory. Methods: Factors related to community members' initial and continued involvement were explored using analyses of the contents of in-depth interviews and written documentation through pattern identification, clustering of conceptual groupings, identification of relationships between variables, constant comparisons, and theoretical memos. Subjects: Respondents included 14 participants, the 12 members of the Board of Directors and two paid staff (i.e., the project coordinator and the health centre nurse). Results: Specific personal, community-related, and organizational factors have influenced community members' involvement in the project. These factors were grouped into an explanatory model.
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 | 0.021 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".