Factors associated with limited access to condoms and sources of condoms during the COVID-19 pandemic in South Africa
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Evidence has shown that the prescribed lockdown and physical distancing due to the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have made accessing essential health care services much more difficult in low-and middle-income countries. Access to contraception is an essential service and should not be denied, even in a global crisis, because of its associated health benefits. Therefore, it is important to maintain timely access to contraception without unnecessary barriers. Hence, this study examines the factors contributing to limited access to condoms and preferred source of condoms during the COVID-19 pandemic in South Africa. Methods This study used data from the National Income Dynamics Study-Coronavirus Rapid Mobile Survey (NIDS-CRAM) wave 1 survey. The NIDS-CRAM is a nationally representative survey of the National Income Dynamics Survey (NIDS), which involves a sample of South Africans from 2017 NIDS wave 5, who were then re□interviewed via telephone interview. This is the first secondary dataset on coronavirus from NIDS during the coronavirus pandemic. A total of 5,304 respondents were included in the study. Data were analysed using frequencies and percentages, chi-square test and binary logistic regression analysis. Results Almost one-quarter (22.40%) of South Africans could not access condoms, and every 7 in 10 South Africans preferred public source of condoms. Those who were other population groups [aOR=0.37; 95% CI=0.19-0.74] and those who were in the third wealth quintile [aOR=0.60; 95% CI=0.38-0.93] had lower odds of having access to condoms while those respondents who were aged 25-34 [aOR=0.48; 95% CI=0.27-0.83] and those with a secondary level of education and above [aOR=0.24; 95% CI=0.08-0.71] were less likely to prefer public source of condom. Conclusion This study concludes that there was limited access to condoms during the COVID-19 pandemic and that the preferred source of condoms was very skewed to public source in South Africa. Strategic interventions such as community distribution of free condoms to avert obstruction of condom access during the COVID-19 pandemic or any future pandemics should be adopted.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,012 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».