Adolescent Mothers’ Perceptions of a Mobile Phone-Based Peer Support Intervention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Postpartum depression (PPD) is prevalent among adolescent mothers and is associated with negative maternal and infant outcomes. Peer support can improve health outcomes among adult and adolescent populations and involves the provision of informational, emotional, and appraisal support delivered by a peer. PURPOSE: To describe adolescent mothers' perceptions of a mobile phone-based peer support (MPPS) intervention designed to prevent PPD. METHODS: = 16). Maternal perceptions of the intervention were measured using the validated Peer Support Evaluation Inventory at 12 weeks postpartum. RESULTS: Participants acknowledged receiving supportive actions including emotional (91%), informational (66%), and appraisal (64%) support. Participants perceived positive relationship qualities with their peer mentor such as trustworthiness (94%), acceptance (75%), empathy (81%), and commitment (81%) and felt their peer mentor possessed social competence (91%) and social skills (91%). Overall, 100% of participants were satisfied with their peer support experience and would recommend this type of support to a friend. CONCLUSION: Participants perceived their experience with the MPPS intervention positively, which lends support to MPPS as an acceptable way to provide support to adolescent mothers.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".