Service user and healthcare provider perspectives on barriers for men using sexually transmitted infection services in public hospital of Nepal: a qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background In a time of rapid modernization in Nepal, most Nepalese men are engaging in more risky sexual health behaviours. As most of these Nepali men have little factual information or guidance about sexual health or access to health care, it is imperative to explore how and if there remain particular barriers to sexual health service use for sexually transmitted infection (STI) prevention, screening and treatment. Our study explored the perspectives of healthcare providers and Nepalese men as service users who access public hospital in Nepal, regarding the barriers to STI service use.Methods 18 semi-structured interviews were conducted through purposive sampling for healthcare service providers while Nepali male service users between age 25–49 years were interviewed following a convenience sampling. Qualitative thematic analysis, separately for providers and service users was conducted in order to identify varying perspectives regarding barriers to STI service use.Results The main barriers by healthcare providers include low health literacy, poor user-provider interaction, overcrowding in service delivery, and in maintaining confidentiality. Service users mentioned about poor sexual health knowledge and confidentiality remain a concern, while both groups mentioned about fear of infection with STI as a facilitator factor in availing sexual health service screening and treatment.Conclusion Our data identify complexities of delivering sexual health services to Nepali men and barriers to service use. The data suggest that there is a need for greater education regarding STIs and related services, and also consideration of the various cultural factors that influence service use in Nepal.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".