Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29976216›Full record

ArticleReproductive health2018

Acceptability and stakeholders perspectives on feasibility of using trained psychologists and health workers to deliver school-based sexual and reproductive health services to adolescents in urban Accra, Ghana.

Philip Teg-Nefaah Tabong, Ernest Tei Maya, Terence Adda-Balinia, Dela Kusi-Appouh, Harriet Birungi, Placide Tabsoba, Philip Baba Adongo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Reproductive health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Philip Teg-Nefaah TabongDepartment of Social and Behavioural Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana. philgh2001@yahoo.com.
Ernest Tei MayaDepartment of Population, Family and Reproductive Health, School of Public Health, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana.
Terence Adda-BaliniaPopulation Council, Accra, Ghana.
Dela Kusi-AppouhPopulation Council, Accra, Ghana.
Harriet BirungiPopulation Council, City, Nairobi, Kenya.
Placide TabsobaPopulation Council, Accra, Ghana.
Philip Baba AdongoDepartment of Social and Behavioural Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdolescent sexual and reproductive health is recognized as a key developmental issue of international concern. However, adolescents' access to sexual and reproductive health (SRH) information and services is largely inadequate in sub-Saharan Africa. With increasing enrollment in schools, this could be an avenue to reach adolescents with SRH information and services. This study was therefore conducted to assess the acceptability and stakeholders' perspectives on the feasibility of using health workers and trained psychologists to provide school-based SRH services in Ghana.

methodsFourteen (14) focus group discussions (N = 136) were conducted; 8 among adolescents aged 12-17 years (4 boys, 4 girls groups), 4 among parents (2 males, 2 females groups) and two among mixed teacher groups. We also conducted 18 in-depth interviews with teachers, managers of schools, health workers, clinical psychologists, as well as adolescent SRH program managers in the Ghana Health Service, Ghana Education Service, UNICEF, UNESCO and National Population Council, Ghana. We audio-recorded all interviews and took field notes. Interviews were transcribed and transcripts imported into NVivo 11 for analysis using grounded theory approach to qualitative data analysis.

resultsMany respondents reported that it was challenging for parents and/or teachers to provide adolescents with SRH information. For this reason, they agreed that it was a good idea to have health workers and psychologists provide SRH information and services to adolescents in school. Although, there was general agreement about providing SRH services in school, many of the respondents disagreed with distribution of condoms in schools as they believed that availing condoms would encourage adolescents to experiment with sex. While majority of respondents thought it was acceptable to use psychologists and health workers to provide school-based sexual and reproductive health to adolescents, some teachers and education managers thought the implementation of such a program would oppose practical challenges. Key among the challenges were how to pay for the services that health workers and trained psychologists will render, and the availability of psychologists to cater for all schools.

conclusionStakeholders believe it is feasible and acceptable to use trained psychologists and health workers to deliver school-based SRH information and services in the Ghanaian school context. However, provisions must be made to cater for financial and other logistical considerations in the implementation of school-based SRH programs.

Indexed as

Reproductive Health ServicesAdolescentChildFemaleFocus GroupsGhanaHealth PersonnelHumansMalePsychologyQualitative ResearchReproductive HealthSexual BehaviorSexual HealthUrban PopulationWorkforceAcceptabilityAdolescentsFeasibilityGhanaHealth workersPsychologistsSchool-based adolescents health servicesSexual and reproductive health

Identifiers

PMID29976216
PMCPMC6034281

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.