MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Contraception for Adolescents

2020· article· en· W3004827414 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Research in Pediatric Endocrinology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Contraception
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaOttawa HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersPfizer
KeywordsMedicineUnintended pregnancyFamily planningBiopsychosocial modelReproductive healthAbortionFamily medicinePregnancyPopulationDeveloped countryPsychiatryEnvironmental healthResearch methodology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although pregnancy and abortion rates have declined in adolescents, unintended pregnancies remain unacceptably high in this age group. The use of highly effective methods of contraception is one of the pillars of unintended pregnancy prevention and requires a shared decision making process within a rights based framework. Adolescents are eligible to use any method of contraception and long-acting reversible contraceptives, which are “forgettable” and highly effective, may be particularly suited for many adolescents. Contraceptive methods may have additional non-contraceptive benefits that address other needs or concerns of the adolescent. Dual method use should be encouraged among adolescents for the prevention of both unintended pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections. Health care providers have an important role to play in ensuring that adolescents have access to high quality and non-judgmental reproductive health care services and contraceptive methods in adolescent-friendly settings that recognize the unique biopsychosocial needs of the adolescent.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.372
GPT teacher head0.564
Teacher spread0.192 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it