MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214884168 · doi:10.21134/haaj.v22i1.652

“USANDO CONDÓNâ€: UNA INTERVENCIÓN CONDUCTUAL CUASI-EXPERIMENTAL BASADA EN TEORÃA PARA MEJORAR LA AUTOEFICACIA PERCIBIDA DEL USO DEL CONDÓN EN ADOLESCENTES MEXICANOS

2022· article· es· W4214884168 on OpenAlexaff
Alma Angélica Villa-Rueda, Erick Landeros-Olvera, Mostafa Shokoohi

Bibliographic record

VenueAfrican journal of rhetoric · 2022
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Lifestyle Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPsychologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aim: Sexually transmitted infections and pregnancy are public health problems in adolescence, preventable with the consistent condom use. This article presents the preliminary efficacy of “Usando Condón”, a theory-based be­havioral intervention to increase the perceived self-efficacy for condom use. Method: “Usando Condón” consisted in two 90-minute sessions targeting Mexican adolescents aged 15-19 years. The sampling method was divided into three phases: a) randomization of high schools; b) randomization of selected high schools; c) non-probabilistic parti­cipants sampling. Three hundred ninety-two adolescents were included and distributed in three groups: experimen­tal group experimental-group (n = 132), control-pamphlet group (n = 130) and control-control group (n = 130). The intervention was measured with the Self-efficacy Scale for Condom Use among Mexican Adolescents. Inferential statistics were used. Results: The groups were equivalent (sociodemographic variables), except for age (p > .05). Significant statistical difference between controls and experimental groups was found at the re-test (p < .05, F = 18.089, CI 95%). Conclusion: “Usando Condón” increased the perceived self-efficacy for condom use levels among adolescents. The intervention needs to be further tested in different contexts.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.345 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAfrican journal of rhetoricSame topicHealth and Lifestyle StudiesFrench-language works237,207