MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W6920643870 · doi:10.60692/nfkcc-m4011

How do we reach the girls and women who are the hardest to reach? Inequitable opportunities in reproductive and maternal health care services in armed conflict and forced displacement settings in Colombia

2018· article· en· W6920643870 sur OpenAlexaff

Notice bibliographique

RevueGreater South Information System · 2018
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Établissements canadiensCanadian Council on International LawUniversity of Ottawa
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésInequalityReproductive healthHealth careHealth equitySocial inequalityHealth policyPublic health

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

This paper assesses inequalities in access to reproductive and maternal health services among females affected by forced displacement and sexual and gender-based violence in conflict settings in Colombia. This was accomplished through the following approaches: first, we assessed the gaps and gradients in three selected reproductive and maternal health care services. Second, we analyzed the patterns of inequalities in reproductive and maternal health care services and changes over time. And finally, we identified challenges and strategies for reaching girls and women who are the hardest to reach in conflict settings, in order to accelerate progress towards universal health coverage and to contribute to meeting the Sustainable Development Goals of good health and well-being and gender equality by 2030.Three types of data were required: data about health outcomes (relating to rates of females affected by conflict), information about reproductive and maternal health care services to provide a social dimension to unmask inequalities (unmet needs in family planning, antenatal care and skilled births attendance); and data on the female population. Data sources used include the National Information System for Social Protection, the National Registry of Victims, the National Administrative Department of Statistics, and Demographic Health Survey at three specific time points: 2005, 2010 and 2015. We estimated the slope index of inequality to express absolute inequality (gaps) and the concentration index to expresses relative inequality (gradients), and to understand whether inequality was eliminated over time.Our findings show that even though absolute health care service-related inequalities dropped over time, relative inequalities worsened or remain unchanged. All summary measures still indicated the existence of inequalities as well as common patterns. Our findings suggest that there is a pattern of marginal exclusion and incremental patterns of inequality in the reproductive and maternal health care service provided to female affected by armed conflict.Overall, the effects of conflict continue to threaten reproductive and maternal health in Colombia, impeding progress towards the realization of universal health care (UHC) and reinforcing already-existing inequities. Key messages and steps forward include the need to understand the two distinct patterns of inequalities identified in this study in order to prompt improved general policy responses. Addressing unmet needs in reproductive and maternal health requires supporting gender equality and prioritizing the girls and women in regions with the highest rates of victims of armed conflict, with the objective of leaving no girl or woman behind. This analysis represents the first attempt to analyze coverage-related inequality in reproductive and maternal health care services for female affected by armed conflict in Colombia. As the World Health Organization and global health systems leaders call for more inclusive engagement, this approach may serve as the key to shaping people-centred health systems. In this particular case, health care facilities must be located in close proximity to girls and women in conflict and post-conflict settings in order to deliver essential reproductive and maternal health care services. Finally, reducing inequalities in opportunities would not only promote equity, but also drive sustainable development.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,041
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,390

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,031
Tête enseignante GPT0,250
Écart entre enseignants0,220 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2018
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueGreater South Information SystemMême sujetGlobal Maternal and Child HealthTravaux en français237 207