Profile of health facilities and determinants of the family planning services supply to unmarried adolescents in Burkina Faso, Ghana, and Niger
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Despite numerous interventions to facilitate adolescents' access to family planning (FP) services in West Africa, studies reveal that unmarried adolescents have difficulties accessing these services. This study analyses the supply of the FP services package to unmarried adolescents as well as the profiles of the facilities that provide this package in Burkina Faso, Ghana, and Niger. Also, it examines the determinants of the supply of this package. Design: The study adopted a spatiotemporal descriptive analysis and a binary logistic Generalized Estimating Equation (GEE) model. The data come from surveys conducted in the three countries between 2013 and 2019 as part of the Performance Monitoring and Accountability 2020 program. Participants: The target population consists of health facilities that provide health services. Results: The study indicates that more than 80% of FP services are provided by basic health facilities in Burkina Faso and Niger, while in Ghana, the profile is more diversified, including hospitals, polyclinics, and public and private primary health centres. The econometric analysis indicates that regional ownership, examination of client opinion data, ownership of a functioning computer, and knowledge of the served population are the main determinants of the supply of the FP services package to unmarried adolescents. Conclusion: By identifying facility profiles and determinants of FP services supply, this study provides a pathway for action to ensure that adolescents have access to these services regardless of their marital status in West Africa. Funding: This work was carried out with the support of the COMCAHPSS project funded by IDRC and the Adolescent Health in West Africa (Adowa) project funded by MRC.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".