MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Predictive Model of the Fertility Pattern of Young Women (15-24 Years Old) In South Sulawesi, Indonesia

2022· article· en· W4406351631 on OpenAlexaff
Bs. Titi Haerana, Lilis Widiastuty, Yudi Adnan, Ranti Ekasari, Rimawati Aulia Insani Sadarang, Dian Rezki Wijaya, Wisnu Fadila, Syahrul Basri

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial medicine · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Dynamics and Relationships
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFertilityDemographyGender studiesGynecologyGeographyMedicineSociologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Teenagers that have given birth have a high chance of a total fertility rate and prevalence. The study aimed to analyze the contribution of demographic and socio-economic factors, access to information, sexual activity, and literacy on family planning on the fertility pattern of young women (15-24 years old). This research uses 2017 data from the Indonesian Demography and Health Survey (IDHS). Data analysis performed multiple logistic regression with a predictive model. The predictors of young female fertility (15-24 years old) were marital status (aOR: 373.9, 95%CI 112.7-1239.8), age of 19-21 years old (aOR: 7.74, 95%CI 2.19-27.32), age of 22-24 years old (aOR: 4.79, 95%CI 1.61-14.32), a low education level (aOR: 2.53, 95%CI 0.94-6.82), unemployed (aOR: 2.73, 95%CI 1.14-6.55) or working in agriculture (aOR: 1.16, 95%CI 0.19-6.87), and low (aOR: 1.79, 95%CI 0.73-4.41) or medium (aOR: 1.58, 95%CI 0.42-5.87) wealth index, based on SKDI's 2017 data. There needs to be an improvement in the education access to increase job opportunities and improve the socio-economic conditions of the community. This improvement will have positive impacts in preventing adolescent marriage and decreasing the fertility rate of young women

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.417
Threshold uncertainty score0.534

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.269
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 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial medicineSame topicFamily Dynamics and RelationshipsFrench-language works237,207