MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390601625 · doi:10.4081/jphia.2023.2436

Perception and experience of relatives of pregnant teenagers: a qualitative study in the North and Northeast departments of Haiti

2023· article· en· W4390601625 on OpenAlexafffund
Léonel Philibert, Patrice Ngangue, J Lapierre, Paulin Mulatris, Alice Prophète, Gbètogo Maxime Kiki, Gisèle Mandiangu Ntanda

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Public Health in Africa · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversité du Québec en OutaouaisUniversité Laval
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsFertilityPsychologyTeenage pregnancyPsychological interventionHumanitiesDemographySociologyPopulationPsychiatryArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Teenage pregnancy remains a global problem because of its consequences for the teenager, her child, her family, and society. In Haiti, this type of pregnancy burdens the family economy. In addition, the adolescent fertility rate is still high, despite efforts to reduce it. This article aims to analyze the perception and experiential experience of relatives of pregnant adolescents in Haiti. A qualitative study design based on Dewey's social survey was conducted. Data were collected from 17 relatives (partners, parents, guardians, and others) of pregnant adolescents in Haiti's North and Northeast departments. These data were analyzed using thematic analysis. According to the results, teenage pregnancy is seen as a disaster or a social problem in Haiti. It leads to many psychosocial and economic difficulties for the relatives, who are the only source of economic and social support for pregnant adolescents. Considering the vulnerability of relatives, policies, and interventions aimed at reducing the negative consequences of teenage pregnancy should consider this group of individuals.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.193
Threshold uncertainty score0.173

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Public Health in AfricaSame topicGlobal Maternal and Child HealthFrench-language works237,207