MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2789983393 · doi:10.3917/spub.176.0909

Une méta-synthèse sur le genre, le handicap et la santé reproductive en Afrique subsaharienne

2018· review· fr· W2789983393 on OpenAlexaff
Muriel Mac-Seing, Christina Zarowsky

Bibliographic record

VenueSanté Publique · 2018
Typereview
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Rights and Representation
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Reproductive health remains a major global health issue. People with disabilities face additional discrimination and barriers to access which need to be better understood. To contribute to future interventions, we examined the intersections between gender and disability related to reproductive health in sub-Saharan Africa in the qualitative literature. METHODS: We conducted a meta-synthesis, using a taxonomic analysis. An inductive and iterative approach was adopted to allow exploration of new and emergent semantic variations in themes. NVivo 11 Plus was used to code themes. RESULTS: Ten qualitative studies from six sub-Saharan African countries were analysed. Two main thematic areas emerged from the analysis: 1) gendered roles of people with disabilities are programmed by sociocultural normativity, including perceptions about sexuality. They are exacerbated by the hegemony of ableism and influenced by the type of reproductive health issues experienced by people with disabilities; and 2) experiences of disability in interaction with a reproductive health issue are exacerbated by the type of disability, influenced by the type of barriers to access, and perceived differently depending upon the actors involved. DISCUSSION: The intersections between gender and disability embodied by people with disabilities are multiple and complex. Not only do imposed gendered roles influence the lives of people with disabilities, but their experiences of disability are also intricately linked to gender. An intersectional analysis is proposed as a useful support to developing future perspectives.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.073
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.151

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.073
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0190.021
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.335 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSanté PubliqueSame topicDisability Rights and RepresentationFrench-language works237,207