ArticleFrontiers in public health2024
Enhancing cultural sensitivity in the implementation of the Fertility Quality of Life Tool in Sudan: a science diplomacy perspective.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Infertility is a global health challenge impacting quality of life, particularly in low and middle-income countries such as Sudan. The Fertility Quality of Life (FertiQoL) tool, a standardized questionnaire, is pivotal in assessing fertility-related quality of life. However, existing research on its utility has primarily been conducted in Global North and High-Income Countries, highlighting the need to shift away from neocolonialism to promote truly inclusive research and effective healthcare practices. Science diplomacy, through the adaptation and culturally sensitive implementation of research tools, can serve as a catalyst for addressing health disparities on a global scale. This study aims to assess methodological and cultural considerations that impact the implementation of the FertiQoL tool in Sudan, framed within the context of science diplomacy and neocolonialism. By investigating the challenges and opportunities of utilizing this tool in a non-Western cultural setting, we seek to contribute to the broader discussion on decolonizing global health research. Methods: Utilizing an explanatory sequential design involving surveys and interviews, we conducted a study in a Sudanese fertility clinic from November 2017 to May 2018. A total of 102 participants were recruited using convenience sampling, providing socio-demographic, medical, and reproductive history data. The Arabic version of FertiQoL was administered, with 20 participants interviewed and 82 surveyed (40 self-administered and 42 provider-administered). We applied descriptive statistics, one-way ANOVA, thematic analysis, and triangulation to explore methodological and cultural nuances. Results: Most participants were educated women who lived in urban areas. While the ANOVA results revealed no statistically significant differences in FertiQoL scores based on the mode of administration [core score ( Conclusion: Our findings emphasize the significance of incorporating cultural sensitivity into the interpretation of FertiQoL scores when implementing it globally. This approach aligns with the principles of science diplomacy and challenges neocolonial structures by acknowledging the unique lived experiences of local populations. By fostering cross-cultural understanding and inclusivity in research, we can enhance the implementation of FertiQoL and pave the way for novel interventions, increased funding, and policy developments in the Global South, ultimately promoting equitable global health.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.