MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4250200518 · doi:10.1037//0278-6133.21.2.177

Information-motivation-behavioral skills model-based HIV risk behavior change intervention for inner-city high school youth.

2002· article· en· W4250200518 on OpenAlexaff
Jeffrey D. Fisher, William A. Fisher, Angela D. Bryan, Stephen J. Misovich

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Psychology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBehavior changeIntervention (counseling)PsychologyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Positive Youth DevelopmentBehavioral riskDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyApplied psychologyMedicineSocial psychologyEnvironmental healthPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Un~ierslty ot HartfordThl\ study assesied the eftect.; of 3 theoreticall) grountled, school-based HIV prevention intcr\cntion~ on inner-cit!, minority high school students' levels of HIV pre\ention ~nfor~nxion.mot~~ation.heha\ ioral shill^, and heha\~or.11 in\ol\cd a quasi-expermental controlled trial comparing classroom-based.peer-habed.and cornb~ned classroo~n-and peer-based HIV preventloll ~uterventions with a stantlxd-ofcare control condit~on in 1 urban h~gh schools Ih' = 1,532.primar~l) 9th-grade students).At 12 nlonths postintervention, the classroon-based Intenentlon resulted in sustainctl changea In HIV prevention beha\ior.Thl.\ article diwusacs \vh) both of the inter\ent~ons in\ol\ing peers \\ere less effective than the clasaroo~n-based intervention at the 11-month follo\v-up and.more gencmllq, suggesta a set of possihle limiting contlit~ons for the eft~cacy o f peer-based inter\cntlon.\.Kt?. 110rt1\: IMK model, HIV pre\ention inlerwnt~on.high school HIV pre\ention

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.254
GPT teacher head0.495
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations42
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth PsychologySame topicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive HealthFrench-language works237,207