The Effect of Instructional Guidelines on Knowledge of Female Students Regarding Risks of Masturbation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Masturbation is defined as the act of touching oneself to feel sexual pleasure and/or orgasm. Masturbation is not a topic frequently and overtly discussed in families or at school and lead to physical and psychological problem. Aim of the current study: To evaluate the effect of instructional guidelines on knowledge of female students regarding risks of masturbation. Research design: A quasi-experimental design used in the present study. Setting: The study was conducted at Al-Fayoum University in student housing (guest-house) in Egypt. Type of Sample: A purposive sample used in this study. Sample size: A total of (90) female student selected according to inclusion criteria. Tools: Two Tools used to collect the necessary data. Tool I: Structured Interviewing sheet: To assess Socio-demographic data Tool II: A female’s knowledge assessment sheet about risk of masturbation. Results: There was a marked improvement in total female students’ knowledge, less than one quarter (22.2%) of the studied female students have satisfactory level of total knowledge about risk of masturbation at pre intervention. While changed to be the majority (83.3%) at post implementation of instructional guidelines. Conclusion: The findings of the current study concluded that, level of knowledge improved after intervention (applying instructional guidelines on knowledge of female students regarding risks of masturbation). With statistically significant differences. The finding supports the research hypothesis. Recommendation: The health care provider should give health education for all female student in all age group to avoid and weaning from masturbation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".