MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391930600 · doi:10.1186/s12978-024-01753-w

To what extent did implementing a community-embedded intervention align with the goals and roles of stakeholders in adolescent sexual and reproductive health?

2024· article· en· W4391930600 on OpenAlex
Chinazom N. Ekwueme, Chinyere Okeke, Irene Ifeyinwa Eze, Chinyere Mbachu, Obinna Onwujekwe

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueReproductive Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsReproductive healthPsychological interventionFocus groupIntervention (counseling)Public healthNursingQualitative researchService delivery frameworkMedicinePublic relationsMedical educationPsychologyService (business)Environmental healthPopulationBusinessPolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Adolescents' sexual and reproductive health (SRH) needs are largely unmet due to poor access to SRH information and services. A multicomponent community-embedded intervention, comprising advocacy to policymakers and community leaders, training of health workers on the provision of youth-friendly SRH services, and establishment of school health clubs, was implemented in Ebonyi State, Nigeria, to improve access to SRH information and services for adolescents aged 13-18 years in selected communities and secondary schools. This study explored the extent to which the intervention aligned with goals and roles of stakeholders in the State. METHODS: Qualitative in-depth interviews (30) were conducted with key stakeholders in adolescent health programming in the State, and community gatekeepers (traditional and religious leaders) in the intervention communities. Sex-disaggregated focus group discussions (10) were conducted with health service providers, parents/guardians of adolescents. Data was analyzed deductively based on fit of strategy and two constructs of the Theoretical Framework for Acceptability - burden, and opportunity cost. The transcripts were coded in NVivo 12, and the subthemes that emerged from each construct were identified. RESULTS: Stakeholders perceived the ASRH intervention activities to align with their individual goals of sense of purpose from serving the community and organizational goals of improving the visibility of adolescent reproductive health programs and aligned with their routine work. Hence, implementing or participating in the interventions was not considered a burden by many. Although the delivery of the interventions constituted additional workload and time commitment for the implementers, the benefits of partaking in the intervention were perceived to outweigh the inputs that they were required to make. Some of the community health workers in the intervention felt that provision of financial incentive will help with making the intervention less burdensome. To participate in the intervention, opportunity cost included forgoing work and business activities as well as family commitments. CONCLUSION: Findings from the study show that the intervention aligned with individual/organizational goals of stakeholders. To improve acceptability of the ASRH interventions, interventions should leverage on existing programs and routine work of people who will deliver the interventions.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.384
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.211
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.258 · 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