MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946488921 · doi:10.3390/ijerph16101763

What If Your Husband Doesn’t Feel the Pressure? An Exploration of Women’s Involvement in WaSH Decision Making in Nyanchwa, Kenya

2019· article· en· W2946488921 on OpenAlexafffund
Thelma Zulfawu Abu, Elijah Bisung, Susan J. Elliott

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
FundersUniversity of Waterloo
KeywordsSanitationEmpowermentHygieneDominance (genetics)PsychologySustainable developmentPublic relationsEconomic growthPolitical scienceSocioeconomicsSociologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Access to water, sanitation and hygiene (WaSH) is a major challenge in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Women and girls suffer the main burden of a lack of access to WaSH because they are primarily responsible for collecting water for their homes. However, they are often excluded from WaSH decision-making and implementation processes. This research sought to explore women's experiences in participating in WaSH decision-making through a case study in Nyanchwa, Kenya. Twelve (12) key informant interviews were conducted with community leaders and members regarding challenges and possible measures for enhancing women and girls' participation in WaSH decision-making. From this research, it is evident that economic challenges and cultural factors such as male dominance, greatly inhibit women and girls' participation in WaSH decision-making and implementation processes. Other factors such as time constraints and low literacy rates also emerged. The paper concludes with a call for collaboration among women's groups to enhance collective action for improved access to WaSH. This will undoubtedly lead to enhanced community health and wellbeing (Sustainable Development Goal 3, SDG3) through the empowerment of women (Sustainable Development Goal 5, SDG5).

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations24
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public HealthSame topicChild Nutrition and Water AccessFrench-language works237,207