ArticlePloS one2024
Adaptation of the G-NORM (Gender norms scale) in Uganda: An examination of how gender norms are associated with reproductive health decision-making.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- User perceptions of a point-of-use water filtration device: Qualitative, focus group study.PloS one · 2026Article
- A longitudinal study examining how self-injection social norms are associated with contraceptive self-injectable interest and use in rural Uganda.BMC women's health · 2025Article
- Improving contraceptive agency through peer social support: findings from a longitudinal qualitative evaluation of the I-CAN intervention in Uganda.Frontiers in global women's health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRestrictive gender norms exacerbate health inequalities all over the world. More specifically, they prevent women from seeking preventive health services, constrain women's economic empowerment, and are associated with reproductive health decision making. Gender norms, a subset of social norms, are dynamic and change over time. However, we lack data on how they are changing and how these changes affect health outcomes because current measures do not adequately capture the complex concept of gender norms.
methodsWe originally developed and validated a gender norms scale, the G-NORM, in India. In this study, using cross-sectional data, we adapted the G-NORM from Southeast Asia (India and Nepal) to sub-Saharan Africa (Uganda) in four steps: 1. Formulation of new scale items (via qualitative analysis) 2. Cognitive Interviewing 3. Questionnaire Administration (n = 2422 women of reproductive age) and 4. Psychometric analysis (Confirmatory Factor Analysis).
resultsLike the original scale, descriptive norms and injunctive norms comprised two unique sub scales with high Cronbach's alphas (.80 & .92). Average scores differed depending on the type of norm suggesting that some gender norms are changing faster than others. Specifically, more equitable injunctive norms were associated with lower odds of partner-dominated contraceptive decision making but descriptive norms were not.
conclusionsGender norms serve as a multi-faceted determinant of health and wellbeing and require measurement tools which account for their conceptual complexity. Validating the G-NORM in Uganda expands measurement options for researchers in the sub-Saharan African region working to change norms to reduce health inequalities or to understand the gender normative context before beginning a study.
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.