Barriers and facilitators influencing parent–adolescent communication on sexual and reproductive health in Indigenous communities in Latin American countries: protocol for a scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Despite the global efforts to promote adolescent sexual and reproductive health (SRH), many doubts remain on how to ensure universal health access for this population. Many obstacles prevent adolescents from accessing SRH information and services. As a result, adolescents are disproportionally affected by adverse SRH outcomes. Indigenous adolescents are more likely to receive insufficient information and health services due to poverty, discrimination and social exclusion. This situation is compounded by parents' limited access to information and the possibility of sharing this information with younger generations. The literature shows that parents play a crucial role in informing adolescents about SRH, but the evidence remains scarce for Indigenous adolescents in Latin America. We aim to discuss the barriers and facilitators of parent-adolescent communication on SRH for Indigenous adolescents in Latin American countries. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A scoping review will follow the Arksey and O'Malley's framework and the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual. We will include articles published between January 2000 and February 2023 in English and Spanish from seven electronic databases and retrieved references from selected articles. Two independent researchers will screen the articles, excluding duplicates, and extract the data based on the inclusion criteria using a data extraction template. The data will be analysed using a thematic analysis approach. Results will be presented following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for Scoping Reviews checklist and using the PRISMA flow chart, tables and a summary of the key findings. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethical approval is needed to conduct a scoping review considering the data will be retrieved from previous publicly published studies. The results of the scoping review will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal and conferences targeting researchers, programme developers and policymakers that have experience working in the Americas. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/PFSDC.
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 | 0.115 | 0.095 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.020 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.020 | 0.018 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.067 | 0.012 |
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".