Sexual and reproductive health self-care interventions in the Eastern Mediterranean Region: findings from a cross-sectional values and preferences survey to inform WHO normative guidance on self-care interventions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Self-care strategies for sexual and reproductive health (SRH) include practices, tools, and strategies for people to manage their health. Access to SRH services has increased in the Eastern Mediterranean Region (EMR) in the past decade. The objective of this manuscript is to provide a preliminary assessment of self-care SRH interventions focusing on access, knowledge, perceived challenges, and recommendations for the future. We aim to contribute to the evidence base on knowledge and uptake of self-care SRH strategies in the EMR. METHODS: We conducted an online cross-sectional Global Values and Preferences Survey (GVPS) to inform WHO guideline development on self-care interventions for SRH. Recruitment was web-based and included hosting the survey on the WHO Department of Reproductive Health and Research website, and sharing the survey link to diverse SRH websites. Analyses included the subsample of respondents living in EMR countries. We first conducted descriptive statistics of sociodemographic and self-care intervention responses. We then conducted bivariate analyses to examine statistically significant differences in knowledge for each intervention between EMR and non-EMR regions. We extracted open-text responses and applied thematic analysis techniques. RESULTS: There were 53 respondents from the EMR spanning 14 countries, including16 health care providers (HCP) and 37 laypersons. Qualitative responses (n = 16) suggest that (a) perceived benefits of self-care SRH strategies include enhanced SRH access, knowledge, and improved SRH outcomes; (b) perceived concerns include misuse and safety; (c) linkage to care following self-care SRH interventions can consider mobile phone apps, hotlines, health care liaisons, and community outreach; (d) HCP want additional training on strengthening therapeutic alliances with patients and practical information on interventions; and (e) future research can focus on reproductive health, condom use, service barriers, and implementation. EMR respondents reported lower knowledge levels than non-EMR respondents on the following strategies: diaphragm/cervical cap, contraceptive patch, web-based SRH information, post-exposure prophylaxis, re-exposure prophylaxis, and HIV treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of self-care SRH strategies varies by intervention type in the EMR. Future research with larger and more representative samples can inform regional self-care SRH implementation. Knowledge dissemination, stigma reduction, accessibility, and training of health care professionals are key domains for advancing access to self-care SRH strategies in the EMR.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".