Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38749510›Full record

ReviewBMJ global health2024

Gender-transformative programmes: a framework for demonstrating evidence of social impact.

Jessica K Backman-Levy, Margaret Eleanor Greene

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ global health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

2 authors.

Jessica K Backman-LevyBrown School, Washington University in St Louis-Danforth Campus, St Louis, Missouri, USA jessicaklevy@wustl.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0003-5516-4344
Margaret Eleanor GreeneGreeneWorks, Washington, DC, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9370-5506

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ample evidence has demonstrated that gender inequality and restrictive gender norms wield significant influence over health outcomes. While gender-transformative programmes have grown with the aim of challenging these norms and promoting gender equality, their effectiveness in driving sustainable norm change remains a subject of debate. This paper introduces a comprehensive analytical framework designed to assess the impact of these programmes.Drawing from extensive literature reviews of rigorously evaluated health programmes, this framework identifies four key dimensions that are instrumental in determining a programme's potential for transformative change. These dimensions are multiplicative effect, sustainability, spread and scalability. Multiplicative effect emphasises the interconnected nature of societal systems, positing that altering one element can trigger cascading effects throughout the entire system. Sustainability recognises that change within a system is less likely to revert once the structure has shifted. Programmes that facilitate norm change are more likely to sustain the changes brought about by their interventions. Spread acknowledges the importance of engaging entire networks that share the targeted norms. Successful programmes should demonstrate evidence of gender-related outcomes extending beyond the immediate beneficiaries, progressively diffusing through the broader population. Finally, scalability emphasises the need to bring gender-transformative initiatives to a larger scale to effect broader norm change.By aligning programme design and evaluation with these four dimensions, the proposed framework provides a standardised approach for assessing gender-transformative programmes. It shifts the focus from individual-level change to systemic transformation, bridging the gap between programmatic aspirations and the ability to measure genuine progress.

Indexed as

Gender EquityFemaleHumansMaleProgram EvaluationGlobal HealthHealth policyOther diagnostic or toolPublic HealthReview

Identifiers

PMID38749510
PMCPMC11097846

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.