Beliefs and misconceptions about contraception and condom use among adolescents in south-east Nigeria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Misconceptions about the usefulness of condoms and other contraceptives still expose many unmarried adolescents to the risk of unwanted teenage pregnancies and sexually-transmitted infections (STIs). This study explored beliefs and misconceptions about condoms and other contraceptives among adolescents in Ebonyi state, south-east Nigeria. Method: A qualitative study was undertaken in six local government areas in Ebonyi state, southeast Nigeria. Data were collected within a period of one month from in and out-of-school adolescents aged 13 to 18 years using twelve focus group discussions (FGD). The data was analyzed using the thematic framework approach. Result: Majority of the adolescents were knowledgeable about methods of contraception, how they are used and their modes of action. They were also knowledgeable about the dual effects of condoms in prevention of pregnancy and STIs. However, some misconceptions that were expressed by some adolescents were that pregnancy could be prevented by the use of i) hard drugs, ii) laxatives, iii) white chlorine, and iv) boiled alcoholic beverages. Condoms were described by some adolescent boys as reusable. Condoms were also perceived by some adolescents to reduce sexual pleasure, and this opinion was mostly held by boys. Coitus interruptus (withdrawal method) was therefore considered more preferable than condoms for prevention of pregnancy. Conclusion: Although majority adolescents have knowledge about contraception and condom use, some misconceptions still persist. These misconceptions put many adolescents at increased risk for pregnancy and STIs which are detrimental to their health and wellbeing. Concerted efforts should be made through educational and behavior change interventions in schools and within communities to debunk persisting misconceptions about contraception, and properly educate adolescents on safe sex practices.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".