MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407946679 · doi:10.2196/63309

Exploring the Use of Digital Educational Tools for Sexual and Reproductive Health in Sub-Saharan Africa: Systematic Review

2025· review· en· W4407946679 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ramatu Hajia Abdul Hamid Alhassan, Catherine L. Haggerty, Abimbola Fapohunda, Nabeeha Jabir Affan, Martina Anto‐Ocrah

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
KeywordsCritical appraisalGrey literatureSystematic reviewReproductive healthPopulationDigital healthSocial mediaStigma (botany)Medical educationMEDLINEMedicineEnvironmental healthHealth carePolitical scienceAlternative medicineComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Adolescents, particularly those in Sub-Saharan Africa, experience major challenges in getting accurate and comprehensive sexual and reproductive health (SRH) information because of sociocultural norms, stigma, and limited SRH educational resources. Digital educational tools, leveraging the widespread use of mobile phones and internet connectivity, present a promising avenue to overcome these barriers and enhance SRH education among adolescents in Sub-Saharan Africa. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic review to describe (1) the geographic and demographic distributions (designated objectives 1a and 1b, respectively, given their interrelatedness) and (2) the types and relevant impacts of digital educational tools (objective 2). METHODS: We followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, using databases, such as Ovid-MEDLINE, Google Scholar, PubMed, and ERIC, to conduct literature searches. The selection criteria focused on studies that specifically addressed digital educational tools used to assess or deliver SRH education, their implementation, and their effectiveness among the adolescent population in Sub-Saharan Africa. We used the JBI critical appraisal tools for the quality assessment of papers included in the review. RESULTS: The review identified 22 studies across Sub-Saharan Africa that met the inclusion criteria. The 22 studies spanned populations in West, Central, East, and South Africa, with an emphasis on youth and adolescents aged 10-24 years, reflecting the critical importance of reaching these age groups with effective, accessible, and engaging health education (objectives 1a and 1b). There was a diverse range of digital tools used, including social media platforms, mobile apps, and gamified learning experiences, for a broad age range of adolescent youth. These methods were generally successful in engaging adolescents by providing them with accessible and relevant SRH information (objective 2). However, challenges, such as the digital divide, the cultural sensitivity of the material, and the necessity for a thorough examination of the long-term influence of these tools on behavior modification, were noted. CONCLUSIONS: Digital educational tools provide great potential to improve SRH education among adolescents in Sub-Saharan Africa. These technologies can help enhance relevant health outcomes and accessibility by delivering information that is easy to understand, interesting, and tailored to their needs. Future research should focus on addressing the identified challenges, including bridging the digital divide, ensuring cultural and contextual relevance of content, and assessing the long-term impact of digital SRH education on adolescent behavior and health outcomes. Policymakers and educators are encouraged to integrate digital tools into SRH educational strategies that target adolescents in order to improve the SRH of this age group and contribute to improving public health in Sub-Saharan Africa.

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 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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.774
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.516
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.035 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Public Health and SurveillanceSame topicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive HealthFrench-language works237,207