MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006279155 · doi:10.1186/s12889-019-8058-5

Exploring issues in caregivers and parent communication of sexual and reproductive health matters with adolescents in Ebonyi state, Nigeria

2020· article· en· W3006279155 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Public Health · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsReproductive healthMedicineFocus groupThematic analysisBiostatisticsTeenage pregnancyQualitative researchPremarital sexQualitative propertyHuman sexualityPublic healthDevelopmental psychologyDemographyPsychologyClinical psychologyPopulationSexual behaviorEnvironmental healthGender studiesNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Parent-child communication is an effective tool for fostering healthy sexual and reproductive behaviours among adolescents. However, the topic is underexplored in Nigeria. This study examines how parents and caregivers communicate sexual and reproductive health-related matters with adolescents aged 13-18 years in Nigeria. METHOD: The study was undertaken in six communities in Ebonyi state, Nigeria using quantitative and qualitative research methods. Data were collected through, i) cluster randomized survey of 1057 adolescents aged 13-18 years, ii) twelve sex-disaggregated focus group discussions with adolescents aged 13 to 18 years, and iii) eight in-depth interviews with parents and caregivers. Univariate and bivariate analysis were performed for quantitative data, while qualitative data were analysed using thematic framework approach. RESULTS: Less than half (47.9%) of adolescents in the survey reported ever discussing sex-related matters with anyone. Three-quarters of those who had this discussion did so with a friend/peer and this had significant correlation with sex/gender (p = 0.04). Out of 1057 adolescents who participated in the survey only 4.5% had ever discussed sex-related matters with a parent and this correlated significantly with wealth index (p = 0.003). Findings from qualitative interviews show that sex-related discussions between parents and adolescents are sporadic, mostly triggered by unpleasant occurrences, and consist of, i) information on pubertal changes, ii) warnings against intersex relationships and premarital sex, iii) promotion of abstinence, and iv) warnings against teenage pregnancy and unsafe abortion. Some parents were of the opinion that sex-related matters should not be discussed with adolescents because it could be interpreted as tolerance for sexual promiscuity. Overall, parents expressed that their capacity to discuss sex-related matters with adolescents is limited by lack of knowledge, and restrictive religious and cultural norms about adolescent sexuality. CONCLUSION: Communication between parents and adolescents on sexual health and reproductive-related matters rarely occurs. However, when it does, it mostly consists of strict warnings that may not protect adolescents from making unhealthy sexual and reproductive health choices. Interventions to improve parent-adolescent communication of sexual and reproductive health (SRH) should aim at improving parents' capacity to communicate sexual and reproductive health matters, and deconstructing sociocultural norms around adolescent sexuality.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.314
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.112 · 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