MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3111255791 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxaa123

L’évaluation complète de la santé sexuelle à l’ adolescence

2020· article· fr· W3111255791 on OpenAlexaffabout
Natasha Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health
Canadian institutionsCanadian Paediatric Society
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceGynecologyHumanitiesMedicineArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract L’activité et l’expérimentation sexuelles sont des aspects normaux du développement des adolescents, mais peuvent toutefois avoir des effets défavorables sur la santé, y compris sous forme d’infections transmises sexuellement, de grossesse non planifiée et de violence dans les fréquentations. Les conseils préventifs aux adolescents sur la santé sexuelle et reproductive doivent inclure les questions relatives au développement sexuel normal, telles que l’identité et l’attirance, les relations sécuritaires, les activités sexuelles mieux protégées et la contraception. Les professionnels de la santé peuvent améliorer l’éducation sexuelle des jeunes qu’ils rencontrent en cabinet et contribuer à atténuer les effets négatifs de leur sexualité sur la santé. Le présent point de pratique propose l’approche des 7 P pour aider les professionnels de la santé à obtenir une évaluation complète de la santé sexuelle des adolescents. Des enjeux liés à l’adolescence sont abordés, comme l’identité, la confidentialité, le consentement et la violence dans les fréquentations, et des ressources de la Société canadienne de pédiatrie sont proposées pour fournir des cheminements cliniques plus détaillés sur des enjeux connexes : la contraception, la grossesse et les infections transmises sexuellement.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.333 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive HealthFrench-language works237,207