Utilization of a mobile phone application to increase access to sexual and reproductive health information, goods, and services among university students in Uganda
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Innovations to increase access to sexual and reproductive health (SRH) information, goods, and services are needed, particularly in low-income settings. This study assessed the utilization of a mobile phone application (MPA) to increase access to SRH information, goods, and services among university students in Uganda. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of data from: (1) an endline survey performed as a consequence of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of the effectiveness of the MPA, and (2) data from use of the MPA for accessing information, goods, and services over the 6-month time period of the RCT, obtained from in-MPA data collection service providers. We performed descriptive analysis of participant characteristics and their association with the utilization of the MPA using logistic regression; analyses of MPA use for accessing different types of information, goods, and services by gender; and analyses of functionality attributes of the MPA and related services. RESULTS: In the study population of young (median 22 years) predominantly female (61%) students, the utilization of the MPA by those who downloaded it was high (81% overall, 82% female, and 82% male). The most popular information portal was the frequently asked questions (71% utilization); the most popular goods were condoms for males (77% utilization) and sanitary pads for females (94% utilization); and the most popular service was HIV testing and counseling (60% utilization). The MPA demonstrated predominantly positive (responsiveness, non-distracting in-app advertisements, and ease of use) attributes. CONCLUSION: A mobile phone app to increase access to SRH information, goods, and services among university students in Uganda demonstrated high utilization. The results of this study support ongoing and future technical improvement efforts and research on effectiveness, economic efficiency, and scalability, along the continuum of activities to scale this intervention in order to improve SRH in low-income settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: MUREC1/7 No. 07/05-18. Registered; June 29, 2018.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".