Can youth get the contraception they want? Results of a pilot study in the province of Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Canadian contraceptive providers report many barriers to access to contraception, and perceive youth as particularly vulnerable to these barriers. This study explores Quebec youth's experience of obtaining contraception. METHODS: A convenience sample of Quebec youth (aged 14 to 21 years) participated in an online anonymous survey of their experiences obtaining contraception. Data were collected between June 1, 2016 and December 31, 2016. RESULTS: One hundred and five youth were eligible to participate. Of these, 95 had used at least one form of contraception. Twelve (13%) reported not being able to obtain their preferred method of contraception, with cost being the most common barrier (N=10). Eleven participants (12%) stopped using their preferred contraceptive method: cost was a factor in four cases, and difficulty with access to the clinic/prescription in seven. Youth who required confidential access experienced more difficulty obtaining contraception (P<0.01). CONCLUSION: Despite benefitting from universal pharmacare and a network of youth sexual and reproductive health clinics, Quebec youth still experience barriers to obtaining and continuing their preferred contraceptive. Youth who desire confidential care are more likely to experience difficulty obtaining contraception.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".