Male involvement interventions and improved couples’ emotional relationships in Tanzania and Zimbabwe: ‘When we are walking together, I feel happy’
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Male involvement in maternal and child health is recognised as a valuable strategy to improve care-seeking and uptake of optimal home care practices for women and children in low- and middle-income settings. However, the specific mechanisms by which involving men can lead to observed behaviour change are not well substantiated. A qualitative study conducted to explore men's and women's experiences of male involvement interventions in Tanzania and Zimbabwe found that, for some women and men, the interventions had fostered more loving partner relationships. Both male and female participants identified these changes as profoundly meaningful and highly valued. Our findings illustrate key pathways by which male involvement interventions were able to improve couples' emotional relationships. Findings also indicate that these positive impacts on couple relationships can motivate and support men's behaviour change, to improve care-seeking and home care practices. Men's and women's subjective experiences of partner relationships following male involvement interventions have not been well documented to date. Findings highlight the importance of increased love, happiness and emotional intimacy in couple relationships - both as a wellbeing outcome valued by men and women, and as a contributor to the effectiveness of male involvement interventions.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".