MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1592534962 · doi:10.1155/2015/903025

Using Photovoice as a Community Based Participatory Research Tool for Changing Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene Behaviours in Usoma, Kenya

2015· article· en· W1592534962 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBioMed Research International · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParticipatory Visual Research Methods
Canadian institutionsUnited Nations University Institute for Water, Environment, and HealthUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotovoiceSanitationParticipatory action researchCommunity-based participatory researchCommunity healthHygieneGovernment (linguistics)SociologyEnvironmental healthPublic healthPublic relationsMedicineNursingPolitical scienceEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent years have witnessed an increase in the use of community based participatory research (CBPR) tools for understanding environment and health issues and facilitating social action. This paper explores the application and utility of photovoice for understanding water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) behaviours and catalysing community led solutions to change behaviours. Between June and August 2013, photovoice was conducted with eight (8) women in Usoma, a lakeshore community in Western Kenya with a follow-up community meeting (baraza) in May 2014 to discuss findings with the community members and government officials. In the first part of the study, photovoice one-on-one interviews were used to explore local perceptions and practices around water-health linkages and how the ecological and socio-political environment shapes these perceptions and practices. This paper, which is the second component of the study, uses photovoice group discussions to explore participants' experiences with and (re)action to the photographs and the photovoice project. The findings illustrate that photovoice was an effective CBPR methodology for understanding behaviours, creating awareness, facilitating collective action, and engaging with local government and local health officials at the water-health nexus.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.094
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.298
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0940.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.931
GPT teacher head0.727
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it