Evaluation of a youth-led participatory action research to address adolescent sexual and reproductive health and rights issues in Senegal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Participatory approaches are increasingly popular in public health, but remain little used to address adolescent health issues. However, adolescent participation in research has enormous potential for identifying solutions to health issues that concern them. In Senegal, a youth-led participatory action research (YPAR) project was implemented in four communities where teams of adolescents were trained to conduct a research project and identify solutions to address adolescent sexual and reproductive health and rights (ASRHR) issues. This article presents the results of the project evaluation, which aimed to explore the potential of YPAR to address ASRHR issues and inform future YPAR projects. Observations and interviews were carried out during results dissemination meetings in each of the communities. The evaluation of the project demonstrated the potential of YPAR to identify relevant solutions, while promoting positive and meaningful adolescent participation. Despite some difficulties, such as community resistance, the youth researchers were able to successfully complete their research project, while developing their confidence and self-esteem. The adolescents were convinced that they could act as agents of positive social change. This project has shown that it is possible and relevant to involve adolescents in research projects, and that this approach has significant potential in global health.
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 | 0.084 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".