Adolescent Voices in Action—Co-Designing Digital Sexual and Reproductive Health Knowledge Translation Interventions: Community-Based Participatory Action Project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Adolescents need comprehensive education and resources to promote their sexual and reproductive health (SRH) and make informed decisions about their SRH. However, many adolescents fail to secure an opportunity to learn accurate and reliable SRH information, as they face sociocultural barriers, fear of prejudice, and societal stigma. Information available on digital platforms may not always be evidence-based and can further spread misinformation. Digital knowledge translation interventions that provide evidence-based SRH information in North America are limited. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to co-design a digital knowledge translation intervention, reflective of adolescents' voices, to provide evidence-based, accessible, and accurate SRH resources. METHODS: We conducted a large multisite project across 3 cities in Canada. Using a community-based participatory approach and principles of human-centered design, we established adolescent advisory groups (AAGs) to actively engage them in the design, development, and implementation of the intervention. RESULTS: A total of 26 participants were recruited from Edmonton, Vancouver, and Toronto to be part of the advisory groups. AAG members participated in design-thinking sessions to brainstorm ideas for website design, identify informational needs for content development, provide iterative feedback on the design of the intervention, and suggest strategies to improve engagement and interaction. With their input, 6 priority areas were identified to develop SRH resources (ie, puberty, menstruation, sexually transmitted infections, healthy relationships, sexual assault, and contraception). Their feedback informed the design's language, visual appeal, and engagement factors. To promote meaningful engagement of AAGs at each step, we used strategies such as gamification activities, group discussions, and flexible scheduling, resulting in high retention and ownership of the process among AAG members. CONCLUSIONS: Co-designing with adolescents strengthened the intervention's cultural relevance, youth-friendliness, and credibility. Our process emphasizes the significance of involving adolescents in co-designing SRH interventions, which results in more meaningful, long-term, and youth-friendly solutions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.038 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".