Non-use of Contraception by Canadian Youth Aged 15 to 24: Findings From the 2009–2010 Canadian Community Health Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Non-use of contraception is an important contributor to unintended pregnancy. This study assessed non-use of contraception and its determinants among Canadian youth aged 15 to 24. METHODS: Data from the 2009-2010 Canadian Community Health Survey respondents aged 15 to 24 were used to identify non-users of contraception among heterosexual youth who had had intercourse within the previous 12 months, were not pregnant or sterilized, and felt it was important to avoid pregnancy. Sociodemographic, behavioural, and geographic factors were compared for non-users and users of contraception. RESULTS: Among youth at risk for unintended pregnancy, 15.5% were non-users of contraception. There were no differences between sexes. Across regions of Canada, Quebéc had the highest proportion of at-risk youth, but at-risk Quebéc youth were the least likely to be non-users (7.4%; CI 5.7%-9.0%) compared with at-risk youth in the Territories (28.3%; CI 21.6%-35.0%). In the multivariable analysis, aside from residence outside of Quebéc, younger age, lower income, Aboriginal identification (adjusted OR [aOR] 1.67; CI 1.18-2.37), and smoking (aOR 1.55; CI 1.24-1.92) were associated with non-use. Canadian-born youth (aOR 0.61; CI 0.39-0.96) and those enrolled in school (aOR 0.63; CI 0.50-0.81) were less likely to be non-users. CONCLUSION: The 15.5% of Canadian youth at risk for unintended pregnancy who were non-users of contraception represent an estimated 300 000 Canadian youth. Policies and programs to promote and support access to sexual health services and effective contraception with specific attention to supporting the needs of younger teens, Aboriginal youth, newcomers, low-income youth, and youth who are not in school are needed.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".