Involvement of stakeholders in determining health priorities of adolescents in rural South Africa
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: When developing intervention research, it is important to explore issues from the community perspective. Interventions that promote adolescent health in South Africa are urgently needed, and Project Ntshembo ('hope') aims to improve the health of young women and their offspring in the Agincourt sub-district of rural northeast South Africa, actively using stakeholder involvement throughout the research process. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine adolescent health priorities according to key stakeholders, to align stakeholder and researcher priorities, and to form a stakeholder forum, which would be active throughout the intervention. DESIGN: Thirty-two stakeholders were purposefully identified as community members interested in the health of adolescents. An adapted Delphi incorporating face-to-face discussions, as well as participatory visualisation, was used in a series of three workshops. Consensus was determined through non-parametric analysis. RESULTS: Stakeholders and researchers agreed that peer pressure and lack of information, or having information but not acting on it, were the root causes of adolescent health problems. Pregnancy, HIV, school dropout, alcohol and drug abuse, not accessing health services, and unhealthy lifestyle (leading to obesity) were identified as priority adolescent health issues. A diagram was developed showing how these eight priorities relate to one another, which was useful in the development of the intervention. A stakeholder forum was founded, comprising 12 of the stakeholders involved in the stakeholder involvement process. CONCLUSIONS: The process brought researchers and stakeholders to consensus on the most important health issues facing adolescents, and a stakeholder forum was developed within which to address the issues. Stakeholder involvement as part of a research engagement strategy can be of mutual benefit to the researchers and the community in which the research is taking place.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it