Additional file 1 of Examining the recent trends in adolescent sexual and reproductive health in five countries of sub‐Saharan Africa based on PMA and DHS household surveys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Additional file 1: Table S1. Comparing birth, sex and marriage questions asked in both PMA and DHS surveys. Table S2. Trends in adolescents who have ever had sex using all rounds PMA2020 data for assessing the effect of repeated respondent participation in subsequent surveys. Table S3. PMA and recent DHS weighted estimates for adolescents who have ever been pregnant with their respective standard errors and design effect. Table S4. PMA and recent DHS weighted estimates for adolescents who have ever been married with their respective standard errors and design effect. Table S5. PMA and recent DHS weighted estimates for unmarried adolescents who have ever had sex with their respective standard errors and design effect. Table S6. PMA and recent DHS weighted estimates for unmarried sexually active adolescents who use contraceptives with their respective standard errors and design effect. Table S7. Recent DHS estimates for the adolescents who were ever pregnant.
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 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.695 | 0.072 |
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".