Deliverance of the Adolescent Friendly Health Service Standards by Nurses in Otjozondjupa Region of Namibia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the implementation of the national standards for Adolescent Friendly Health Services (AFHS) towards the prevention among others teenage pregnancy the, problem continues to rise across the regions of Namibia. This article presents the findings of a quantitative, cross-sectional, descriptive, analytical study regarding the implementation of the components on Adolescent Friendly Health Care Providers and the Adolescent Friendly Environment of the Adolescent Friendly Health Services standards by nurses in Otjozondjupa Region of Namibia.Quantitative data were collected from 12 registered nurse midwives and 23 enrolled nurse-midwives who implement the AFHS at the health care facilities (through structured self-interview questionnaire) and 18 health care facilities that implement the AFHS in Otjozondjupa Region (through checklist) for triangulation of the data. The data were analysed using the SPSS Version 16 data base. Descriptive and inferential statistics were performed on selected variables to determine the relationship of variables.The findings indicated that only 30% of the registered nurse-midwives compared to 75% of the enrolled nurses who implement the AFHS were formally trained in adolescent reproductive and sexual health issues. The findings further indicated that although 75% and 87% of the respective categories of nurse respondents indicated that they conduct school outreach activities, the initiative seems not being implemented effectively as can be inferred from only 14% of the registered nurse who indicated that they do conduct health education at schools. In the same vein, 90% of the health facilities had no spaces that were designated for the adolescent health services. Therefore, the recommendations were made in respect of the implementation of these two components of the AFHS standards at the health care facilities in the region.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".