A summative content analysis of how programmes to improve the right to sexual and reproductive health address power.

IF 6.1 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH BMJ Global Health Pub Date : 2022-04-01 DOI:10.1136/bmjgh-2022-008438
Marta Schaaf, Victoria Boydell, Stephanie M Topp, Aditi Iyer, Gita Sen, Ian Askew
{"title":"A summative content analysis of how programmes to improve the right to sexual and reproductive health address power.","authors":"Marta Schaaf, Victoria Boydell, Stephanie M Topp, Aditi Iyer, Gita Sen, Ian Askew","doi":"10.1136/bmjgh-2022-008438","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Power shapes all aspects of global health. The concept of power is not only useful in understanding the current situation, but it is also regularly mobilised in programmatic efforts that seek to change power relations. This paper uses summative content analysis to describe how sexual and reproductive health (SRH) programmes in low-income and middle-income countries explicitly and implicitly aim to alter relations of power.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Content analysis is a qualitative approach to analysing textual data; in our analysis, peer-reviewed articles that describe programmes aiming to alter power relations to improve SRH constituted the data. We searched three databases, ultimately including 108 articles. We extracted the articles into a spreadsheet that included basic details about the paper and the programme, including what level of the social ecological model programme activities addressed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The programmes reviewed reflect a diversity of priorities and approaches to addressing power, though most papers were largely based in a biomedical framework. Most programmes intervened at multiple levels simultaneously; some of these were 'structural' programmes that explicitly aimed to shift power relations, others addressed multiple levels using a more typical programme theory that sought to change individual behaviours and proximate drivers. This prevailing focus on proximate behaviours is somewhat mismatched with the broader literature on the power-related drivers of SRH health inequities, which explores the role of embedded norms and structures.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This paper adds value by summarising what the academic public health community has chosen to test and research in terms of power relations and SRH, and by raising questions about how this corresponds to the significant task of effecting change in power relations to improve the right to SRH.</p>","PeriodicalId":9137,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Global Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9021801/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2022-008438","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Power shapes all aspects of global health. The concept of power is not only useful in understanding the current situation, but it is also regularly mobilised in programmatic efforts that seek to change power relations. This paper uses summative content analysis to describe how sexual and reproductive health (SRH) programmes in low-income and middle-income countries explicitly and implicitly aim to alter relations of power.

Methods: Content analysis is a qualitative approach to analysing textual data; in our analysis, peer-reviewed articles that describe programmes aiming to alter power relations to improve SRH constituted the data. We searched three databases, ultimately including 108 articles. We extracted the articles into a spreadsheet that included basic details about the paper and the programme, including what level of the social ecological model programme activities addressed.

Results: The programmes reviewed reflect a diversity of priorities and approaches to addressing power, though most papers were largely based in a biomedical framework. Most programmes intervened at multiple levels simultaneously; some of these were 'structural' programmes that explicitly aimed to shift power relations, others addressed multiple levels using a more typical programme theory that sought to change individual behaviours and proximate drivers. This prevailing focus on proximate behaviours is somewhat mismatched with the broader literature on the power-related drivers of SRH health inequities, which explores the role of embedded norms and structures.

Conclusion: This paper adds value by summarising what the academic public health community has chosen to test and research in terms of power relations and SRH, and by raising questions about how this corresponds to the significant task of effecting change in power relations to improve the right to SRH.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
关于改善性健康和生殖健康权利的方案如何处理权力问题的总结性内容分析
引言力量塑造全球健康的方方面面。权力的概念不仅有助于理解当前形势,而且在寻求改变权力关系的计划努力中也经常被动员起来。本文使用总结性内容分析来描述低收入和中等收入国家的性健康和生殖健康(SRH)计划如何明确和隐含地旨在改变权力关系。方法内容分析是一种对文本数据进行定性分析的方法;在我们的分析中,描述旨在改变权力关系以改善SRH的计划的同行评审文章构成了数据。我们搜索了三个数据库,最终包括108篇文章。我们将这些文章提取到一个电子表格中,其中包括关于论文和计划的基本细节,包括社会生态模式计划活动所涉及的水平。结果所审查的方案反映了解决权力问题的各种优先事项和方法,尽管大多数论文主要基于生物医学框架。大多数方案同时在多个层面进行干预;其中一些是明确旨在改变权力关系的“结构性”计划,另一些则使用更典型的计划理论来解决多个层面的问题,试图改变个人行为和直接驱动因素。这种对近身行为的普遍关注与更广泛的关于性健康和生殖健康不平等的权力相关驱动因素的文献有些不匹配,后者探讨了嵌入规范和结构的作用。结论本文总结了公共卫生学术界在权力关系和性健康和生殖健康方面所选择的测试和研究,并提出了这与改变权力关系以改善性健康和性健康权利的重大任务如何对应的问题,从而增加了价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMJ Global Health
BMJ Global Health Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
4.90%
发文量
429
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊介绍: BMJ Global Health is an online Open Access journal from BMJ that focuses on publishing high-quality peer-reviewed content pertinent to individuals engaged in global health, including policy makers, funders, researchers, clinicians, and frontline healthcare workers. The journal encompasses all facets of global health, with a special emphasis on submissions addressing underfunded areas such as non-communicable diseases (NCDs). It welcomes research across all study phases and designs, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialized studies. The journal also encourages opinionated discussions on controversial topics.
期刊最新文献
Estimating the burden of anaemia in women of reproductive age attributable to wildfire-sourced fine particulate matter: a multicentre cross-sectional study in low- and middle-income countries. Shifting the centre of gravity in the global evidence ecosystem for health: strengthening local leadership and decision-making for national and global impact. Impact evaluation of a population-based 'Screen and Treat for Anaemia Reduction (STAR)' strategy: a cluster randomised trial in rural Telangana, India. Estimating the impact of nutritional transition and ending hunger on tuberculosis in 12 high-burden countries: a model-based scenario analysis. Economic shocks and mental health in Bangladesh.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1