Bibliographic record
Abstract
The high problem of adolescent reproductive health is caused by the lack of basic information about reproductive health in adolescents, so adolescents tend to engage in risky behavior.The study was conducted to analyze the effect of peer education on the level of knowledge and attitudes of adolescents about reproductive health.The design of this study was a quasi-experimental design with pretest-posttest group design.Data collection using interview and observation methods.The study population was all groups of adolescents in Malang City and Regency, with a sample of adolescents who were in Malang City (Kedung Kandang Health Center Area) and Malang District (Jabung Health Center Area).The sample size was 85 teenagers selected by simple random sampling.Data collection using a questionnaire.Data were processed descriptively and analyzed using a statistical t-test.The results showed that there were significant differences in pre-test and post-test in the level of adolescent knowledge (p value <0.001) and adolescent attitudes (p value <0.001).Most adolescents in the intervention group (providing counseling by peer educators) did not support free sex and early marriage (97.3%).Health education by peer educators can remind adolescents' knowledge and attitudes about reproductive health, so that it can be developed for promotive efforts for adolescents.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".