Association between gender norms and attitudes towards abortion among very young adolescents in Kenya and Nigeria: a quantitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Unsafe abortion is a major cause of death in sub-Saharan African countries. Adolescents are at increased risk due to their high vulnerability to unprotected sex and unplanned pregnancies. Abortion beliefs and attitudes are considered to be partly rooted in traditional views on gender and religious influences. This study is informed by the limited data on gender norm perception and its association with abortion attitudes among adolescents, despite the increasing prevalence of unsafe abortion reported among this group. Materials: Data for this study were collected as part of a longitudinal survey on gendered socialisation and sexual and reproductive health (SRH) of in-school adolescents aged 10 - 14 (very young adolescents (VYA)) years in Kenya and Nigeria. The study obtained quantitative data from 1912 VYAs using a structured questionnaire. The results presented in this paper are from the quantitative baseline data collected in Kenya and Nigeria. Result: The study found significant regional differentials in attitudes towards abortion and gender norm perception of the VYA from the two countries. In Nigeria, VYA were more likely to endorse abortion practices relative to their counterparts from Kenya. Factors associated with endorsement of abortion practice were gender norms about sexual double standards and normative heterosexual relations (NHR) in Nigeria and knowledge of where to get a condom, NHR and normative romantic relationship in Kenya. Conclusion: Gender norms are learnt early. Intervention efforts seeking to promote positive gender norms and attitudes towards SRH must begin with the VYA, consider contextual variations and address knowledge and access to SRH commodities and services.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | high |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | medium |
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 | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".