Self-care interventions for advancing sexual and reproductive health and rights – implementation considerations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Self-care refers to the ability of people to promote their own health, prevent disease, maintain health, and cope with illness and disability, with or without the support of a health or care worker. Self-care interventions are tools that support self-care as additional options to facility-based care. Recognizing laypersons as active agents in their own health care, the World Health Organization (WHO)’s global normative guideline on self-care interventions recommends people-centred, holistic approaches to health and well-being for sexual and reproductive health and rights. Examples of such interventions include pregnancy self-testing, self-monitoring of blood glucose and/or blood pressure during pregnancy and self-administration of injectable contraception. Building on previous studies and aligning with the WHO classification for self-care, we discuss nine key implementation considerations: agency, information, availability, utilization, social support, accessibility, acceptability, affordability, and quality. The implementation considerations form the foundation of a model implementation framework that was developed using an ecological health systems approach to support sustainable changes in health care delivery.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".