October 22, 2003

So how many pregnancies?

If I could expand my journalism presentation, I would include this:

Three different studies published on The National Campaign To Prevent Teen Pregnancy website offer three contrasting numbers on the amount of teenager pregnancies throughout the past years, specifically 1996.

When looking at the statistics, note that year: 1996. In The Alan Guttmacher Institute study 96 births occured per 1,000 teens. In The National Center for Health Statistics, 98.7 births per 1,000 teens and in National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health statistics 94.8 births were recorded for 1996 per 1,000 teens.

There are differences in the numbers, impacting the public's perception of the issues, and the manner in which information is being collected and presented.

Posted by Amanda Cochran at October 22, 2003 12:32 PM
Comments

Yay Amanda. I thought this was really interesting. This is totally what they were talking about in IANS. I had trouble finding an article to address in my presentation. It was fun watching you tear this apart. And kind of sad, considering how people might WANT to believe the original story.

Posted by: Jess P at October 22, 2003 2:07 PM

I know, I know! Amanda, I really did enjoy your presentation today. Thanks for enlightening us all (I know that you could have expanded things way beyond the 8 minute limit ;)

Here's my question: is it X number of births per "teens" as in male, female, both, or couples? This is probably important in figuring out the facts since, well, when's the last time anybody heard of a male giving birth, anyway? *hehe* I think the data would be more significant if it were to say X number of births per teenaged girls (however, I do realize that this would practically disseminate the responsibility from the male part of the species--not a good thing to do in the first place...)

Posted by: Karissa at October 22, 2003 2:18 PM

40? I don't see 40 ... I see 98.7 minus 94.8 which rounds off to 4, not 40. Explain, please!

Posted by: Paige at October 22, 2003 4:14 PM

I never looked at the information that way...I just thought about the discrepancy between the numbers.

Good observation Karissa, my macademia white chocolate cookie and cappuchino eating pal.

Posted by: Amanda at October 22, 2003 4:14 PM

The way I calculated it was an overall comparison to 1,000, but I could be mistaken. Whoops!

Four or 40, the margin is still substantial between the studies. I want to make the point that the studies are differently produced and these figures are presented in different ways throughout the net.

I didn't have enough information on the topic to put it into my presentation, and I am glad that I didn't now hehehe. Thanks Paige for the critique. I think I am going to edit it some, so it may not appear the same next time you look at the entry. Thanks.

Posted by: Amanda at October 22, 2003 4:25 PM

First, I could go for a macademia white chocolate cookie, where do you get one of those? :-)

These types of studies, if they are well done, should report a "margin of error". If the margin of error is wide enough, and that's not entirely unreasonable, these studies can be seen as replicating each other's results. I don't know if these studies report a "margin of error" or not, but it seems to me that these studies are remarkably similar, they are less than 5% different in their results, so I guess I disagree with your statement "the margin is still substantial between the studies". But "substantial" is in the eye of the beholder, isn't it?

Posted by: Paige at October 22, 2003 6:12 PM

I guess so.

Posted by: Amanda at October 22, 2003 11:38 PM

Macademia and white chocolate cookies available for a limited time at Lowe Dining Hall. :) **Best when eaten in the company of friends, with a foamy French vanilla cappuchino.

Love ya, Amanda :D

Posted by: Karissa at October 23, 2003 2:41 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?