Measuring HIV outcomes for adolescent girls and young women programs in Africa: Using the polling booth survey technique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Adolescent girls and young women (AGYW) remain highly vulnerable to the risk of acquiring HIV (Human immunodeficiency virus). This study was conducted to measure behavioral, biomedical and structural outcomes for the Global Fund funded AGYW programmes in five African countries with high burden of HIV including Botswana, Cameroon. Lesotho, Malawi and Namibia. METHODS: The study used a mixed methods approach to collect behavioral, structural and biomedical outcome data. Quantitative data were collected through 418 Polling Booth Survey (PBS) sessions from 4,581 AGYWs. Participants were recruited through a community-based multistage sampling technique using sampling weights for urban and rural communities. 23 Focus Group Discussions (FGD) were conducted to understand barriers to use of HIV prevention programme and community recommendations for improved coverage. Ethical approvals were obtained from the ethics review board in all five countries. RESULTS: More than 50% of the respondents from all five countries reported to be sexually active, and at least 30% or more of those who were sexually active had multiple sex partners. There were wide variations between the countries in condom use with a non-marital sexual partner which ranged between 66% in Namibia to 42% in Cameroon. Cameroon (44%) had high percentage of AGYWs with independent income source while school drop-outs were higher in Malawi (55.5%) and Lesotho (46.6%). Nearly 1/4th of AGYWs in all countries, except Namibia, reported experiencing intimate partner violence. Nineteen percent of the respondents were pregnant in the last 12 months, and 50% of those pregnancies were unplanned. Lesotho had the highest proportion of AGYW (90.5%) ever tested for HIV, followed by Malawi (87.5%), Botswana (75%), Cameroon (69%) and Namibia (62.6%). DISCUSSION: There is diversity across the countries, with country-wise and age-wise variations in results. In all countries, the AGYW programme will benefit from a more targeted approach to reach out to the most vulnerable AGYW, strengthening structural interventions, strengthening linkage to PrEP (Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis) and ART (Antiretroviral Therapy) for those who are living with HIV and a strong linkage with reproductive health services. The assessment helped countries to understand the gaps and opportunities to improve the HIV prevention programme with AGYW.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".