A trend analysis of sexual health behaviours of a national sample of Canadian adolescents using HBSC data from 2002–2014
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Regular monitoring of trends in sexual health behaviours of adolescents is required to guide evidence-based intervention programs and health policies. The purpose of this study was to examine national trends in sexual behaviours of Canadian adolescents from 2002 to 2014. Method: A secondary analysis of data was conducted using the Canadian Health Behaviour in School-Aged Children (HBSC) survey of Grade 9 and 10 students over four survey cycles. Sexual behaviours of interest were ever having sexual intercourse, early onset of sexual intercourse, and oral contraceptive, condom, and dual method use at last intercourse. Disaggregated by gender and survey cycle, data were analyzed using cross-tab analyses and aged-adjusted logistic regressions. From 2002 to 2014, boys had decreasing trends in early onset of sexual intercourse [ AOR = 0.55, 95% CI = (0.36–0.85), p = 0.008], and increasing trends in oral contraceptive use [AOR = 1.94, 95% CI = (1.24–3.04), p = 0.004]. During this time, girls had decreasing trends in condom use [AOR = 0.64, 95% CI = (0.41–1.00), p = 0.052], but increasing trends in oral contraceptive use [girls: AOR = 1.47, 95% CI = (0.98–2.19), p = 0.061] approaching statistical significance. No significant trends were noted in ever having sexual intercourse and dual method use for both genders. In sum, boys showed improvements in sexual behaviours over time. The inverse trends of condom use and oral contraceptive use suggested girls’ increasing reliance on oral contraceptive pills instead of condoms. Health services interventions and policies should consider implementing new strategies that better promote dual method use.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".