Interventions for improving the health and socioeconomic well-being of young parents in Africa: a systematic review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Early childbearing is highly prevalent in Africa. Despite the harmful consequences of early childbearing on young people, there is limited documentation of interventions that aim to improve the health and socioeconomic well-being of young parents on the continent. In this systematic review, we will map and provide a critical synthesis of interventions that aim to improve the health and socioeconomic well-being of young parents in Africa to inform future policy and programmatic decision-making. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The systematic review will adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. We will conduct an electronic search of peer-reviewed articles published in six databases: PubMed, Science Direct, AJOL, JSTOR, ERIC and Google Scholar. We will also search for grey literature through Google search and organisations' websites to broaden the number of interventions retrieved. Articles will be included if (1) the study participants are young mothers and fathers aged 10-24 years, (2) the article reports on interventions targeting young mothers and fathers in Africa or individual countries in Africa, (3) the article is published in English or French, (4) the article reports on health and socioeconomic well-being outcomes and (5) the article was published between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2023. We will extract relevant information from articles that meet the inclusion criteria and synthesise data using both quantitative and qualitative approaches. Two reviewers will independently screen articles for inclusion, extract data from included articles and assess the methodological quality of studies. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for the systematic review since we are synthesising publicly available publications. Findings from this systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and further disseminated in conferences and convenings focusing on the health and socioeconomic well-being of young parents. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023464828.
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 | 0.103 | 0.087 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.015 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.084 | 0.017 |
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".