MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225278755 · doi:10.1542/peds.2021-053852k

Interventions Promoting Child Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights in LMICs: A Systematic Review

2022· review· en· W4225278755 on OpenAlexaff
Arone Wondwossen Fantaye, Amos Buh, Dina Idriss-Wheeler, Karine Fournier, Sanni Yaya

Bibliographic record

VenuePEDIATRICS · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsycINFOMedicinePsychological interventionCINAHLReproductive healthSexual abusePoison controlSexual and reproductive health and rightsMEDLINESuicide preventionClinical psychologyPsychiatryEnvironmental healthReproductive rightsPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Middle childhood is a critical period for physical, social, behavioral, and cognitive changes. A positive and healthy sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) foundation can minimize SRHR risks, leading to better outcomes. Our objective is to identify effective educational interventions promoting or supporting the SRHR of school-age children in low and middle-income countries. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, CINAHL, APA PsycInfo, ERIC, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Education Source, Web of Science, SciELO Citation Index, Global Health, and Sociological Abstract were searched from 2000 to December 2020. STUDY SELECTION: Eligible articles had a sample mean age between 5 and 10 years, quantitatively tested the effects of educational interventions against a comparison group, and measured SRHR related outcomes. DATA EXTRACTION: Data extracted from the 11 eligible articles were study methods, participant characteristics, interventions and comparisons, outcome measures, and results. RESULTS: The review found evidence of significant intervention effects on protective knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and skills for preventing sexual violence and HIV infection. The strongest evidence was for significant improvements in children's knowledge of child sexual abuse prevention concepts and strategies. LIMITATIONS: A meta-analysis could not be performed because most studies lacked randomization, included no information on the magnitude of effects, and had inadequate follow-up evaluations to truly assess retention. Only a few studies contributed to findings on protective attitudes, behaviors, and skills against child sexual abuse, gender-based violence, and human immunodeficiency virus infection, as well as physiologic outcome. CONCLUSIONS: The educational interventions demonstrated significant improvements in primary school children's protective capacities, especially in their protective knowledge against sexual abuse.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.006
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.080
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.316 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePEDIATRICSSame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207