MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385851756 · doi:10.29063/ajrh2022/v26i3.5

Barriers to vasectomy acceptance and uptake in Nigeria: A review of the literature.

2022· review· en· W4385851756 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMale Reproductive Health Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVasectomyFamily planningDeveloping countryMedicinePopulationFamily medicineReproductive healthSociocultural evolutionGynecologyEnvironmental healthEconomic growthPolitical scienceResearch methodology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is growing support of male involvement in reproductive health and the integration of voluntary vasectomy services into national family planning programs in lower resource contexts; yet, the prevalence of women of reproductive age who rely on vasectomy in African countries such as Nigeria, is less than 1 percent. This review was conducted to gain a broader understanding of current sociocultural and health systems' conditions that need to be addressed to expand the integration and acceptability of vasectomy as an option for family planning in Nigeria. To explore this, a scoping of existing literature on vasectomy in Nigeria between 2009 to 2021 was conducted. The review focused on qualitative studies and grey literatures. The findings reveal that there is a strong awareness of vasectomy among men in Nigeria. Yet, several factors such as fear and religious and cultural beliefs prevent men from having the same confidence in vasectomy as they have in female biomedical methods. These findings have implications for future family planning policies, strategies and programmes in the country.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.874
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.308 · 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