Co-creation of a health education program for improving the uptake of HIV self-testing among men in Rwanda: nominal group technique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study sought to collaborate with key stakeholders to reach a consensus regarding the predominant barriers preventing the uptake of HIV testing services (HTS) by men and co-create an acceptable educational program to improve the knowledge of HIV self-testing (HIVST) among men in Rwanda. METHODS: We employed the nominal group technique to identify a consensus regarding the predominant barriers currently impeding the male uptake of HTS. The health education program content was guided by the ranked barriers. We applied Mezirow's Transformational Learning Theory for curriculum development. RESULTS: Eleven key barriers currently impeding the male uptake of HTS were identified in the nominal group process. The stakeholders co-created an interactive, structured curriculum containing information on the health locus of control; HIV etiology, transmission, diagnosis, status disclosure benefits, care and treatment services; and an overview of the HIVST background and test procedure to address multiple barriers. CONCLUSION: Key stakeholders co-created a comprehensive health education program tailored to men, which integrates education about health beliefs, HIV/AIDS and HIVST. Further studies to assess the effectiveness of the program are needed. It is anticipated that the intervention will improve the uptake of HIVST among men in Kigali, Rwanda.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".