Country‐Level Gender Equality and Adolescents’ Contraceptive Use in Europe, Canada and Israel: Findings from 33 Countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Although an association between gender equality and contraceptive use has been confirmed among adult samples, few studies have explored this relationship among adolescents. An examination of whether adolescents' contraceptive use is more prevalent in countries with higher levels of gender equality is needed to fill this gap. METHODS: Nationally representative data from 33 countries that participated in the 2013-2014 Health Behaviour in School-Aged Children study and country-level measures of gender equality-using the 2014 Global Gender Gap Index-were analyzed. Multilevel multinomial logistic regression analyses were employed to assess associations between gender equality and contraceptive use (condom only, pill only and dual methods) at last intercourse as reported by 4,071 females and 4,110 males aged 14-16. RESULTS: Increasing gender equality was positively associated with contraceptive use among both males and females. For every 0.1-point increase on the equality scale, the likelihood of condom use at last intercourse rose (odds ratio, 2.1 for females), as did the likelihood of pill use (6.5 and 9.6, respectively, for males and females) and dual method use (2.1 and 5.6, respectively). Associations with pill use and dual use remained significant after national wealth and income inequality were controlled for. Overall, associations were stronger for females than for males. CONCLUSIONS: More research is needed to identify potential causal pathways and mechanisms through which gender equality and adolescents' contraceptive use may influence one another.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".