Factors influencing adoption of sexual and reproductive health intervention for adolescents in Ebonyi, Nigeria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: School and Community-embedded reproductive health interventions have been implemented in developing countries, with evidence that they led to improved sexual and reproductive health among adolescents. However, this type of intervention is rarely evaluated for its potential adoption and use. This study evaluated the constraints and enablers of the adoption of a school and community-embedded intervention that used community engagement, capacity building, partnerships and collaborations to deliver sexual and reproductive health services to adolescents. METHODS: The intervention was implemented between 2019 and 2021 in six local government areas in Ebonyi State. The results on adoption presented here were collected four months into the mid-phase of the project, targeting adolescents, parents, adult family members, healthcare providers, local authorities, and community members. Sixteen in-depth interviews were conducted with policymakers, 14 with health service providers and 18 Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) with parents, community leaders and adolescents who were part of the implementation process. The coding reliability approach, a type of thematic data analysis was used, that involves early theme development and the identification of evidence for the themes. RESULTS: The adoption of school and community-embedded reproductive health intervention was strong among stakeholders at the early stages of the implementation process. Multi-stakeholder involvement and its multi-component approach made the intervention appealing, thereby enabling its adoption. However, at the later stage, the adoption was constrained by beliefs and norms about sexual and reproductive health (SRH) and the non-incentivisation of stakeholders who acted as advocates at the community level. The sustainability of the intervention may be threatened by the non-incentivisation of stakeholders and the irregular supply of materials and tools to facilitate SRH advocacy at the community level. CONCLUSIONS: The inclusive community-embedded reproductive health intervention was adopted by stakeholders because of the enablers which include timely stakeholder engagement. However, for it to be sustainable, implementers must address the non-incentivising of community-level advocates which serve as constraints.
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 | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".