Assessment of Community Stakeholders’ and Health Educators and Professionals’ Needs for the Continuous Enhancement of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights in Mali (Project CLEFS): Protocol for a Convergent Mixed Methods Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In Mali, a lack of qualified human resources in primary health care and sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) is one of the greatest barriers to the population's access to standard health services. Frontline professional training must be strengthened to respond to the needs of the population, particularly those of women and girls. Training must be conducted using an interdisciplinary and adapted approach to promote gender equality. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify the SRHR training needs among the community, educational actors, and primary health care providers. METHODS: A concurrent mixed methods design was adopted, using 2 methods. A quantitative method, through a cross-sectional analytical survey, will be conducted at the community level with university community health centers (CSCom-U) users and adolescents in CSCom-U health areas, as well as at the health education institution and community health centers levels with teachers, students, and interdisciplinary professional groups within the CSCom-U and district hospital maternity. Descriptive and inferential analyses will be conducted to process quantitative data. This research is at the stage of data analysis and interpretation. A qualitative method, based on 3 sources of data (focus groups, individual semistructured interviews, and document analysis), which involved the same targets as the quantitative component, with additional community actors such as Community Health Associations (Associations de santé communautaire) and Women's Service User Communities. A thematic analysis of the qualitative data using a mixed deductive and inductive method will be performed. RESULTS: : Field data collection took place from March to April 2022. Quantitative data from 3153 participants are being analyzed using SPSS. Qualitative data from 11 interviews and 27 focus groups were processed with Qualitative Data Analysis Miner. Data analysis is still ongoing. CONCLUSIONS: This study will provide a better understanding of adolescents and SRHR user's service needs in terms of health services availability and quality and SRHR knowledge, issues related to student training quality, the level of adequacy between the training offered and the actual needs of the service recipients, and the level of preparation and ability of teachers to provide quality teaching taking gender equity into account. The recommendations drawn from this assessment will propose concrete actions to improve women and girls' health services provided by professionals, and to better adapt the future health professionals' profiles to the needs of communities, particularly those of women and girls. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/64796.
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 | 0.070 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.029 | 0.004 |
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".