MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946874174 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v11n7p9

The Role of Female Partners in the uptake of Voluntary Medical Male Circumcision in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Review

2019· review· en· W2946874174 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Celenkosini Thembelenkosini Nxumalo, Gugu Mchunu

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenital Health and Disease
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthCommon FundFogarty International CenterNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMale circumcisionMedicineDeveloping countryTurnoverFamily medicineHealth servicesEnvironmental healthPopulationEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Voluntary Medical Male Circumcision (VMMC) is a proven biological strategy for reducing heterosexual transmission of HIV/AIDS by up to 60%. Following recommendations from the World Health Organisation (WHO), Medical Circumcision (MC) was rolled out in South Africa. Several issues, among them being individual perceptual factors and female partner influence, have constituted as both obstacles and drivers to the uptake of VMMC. AIM: To explore and synthesize research conducted on the role of female partners in the uptake of VMMC. METHODS: Electronic searches were conducted in PUBMED, MEDLINE and CIHNAL, studies included in the review are those that explored the importance of female partner involvement in the uptake of VMMC. The review was limited to sub-Saharan Africa with a focus on peer reviewed articles written in English only. RESULTS: The review has revealed that considering the gender dimensions of circumcision, the possible utilisation of women as vehicles to drive the uptake of MC could be key to achieving the desired uptake. CONCLUSION: It is postulated that women play a key role in terms of promoting circumcision in order to facilitate a successful scale up of the service. Further research is therefore necessary so that the benefits of female partner involvement in VMMC may be achieved.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.358 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health ScienceSame topicGenital Health and DiseaseFrench-language works237,207