ArticleBMC women's health2025
Women's and girls' sexual empowerment differs by geographical context: a population-based validation study.
Article in BMC women's health, 2025. 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo validate a sexual empowerment sub-scale of the Women’s and Girls’ Sexual and Reproductive Empowerment Index (WGE-SRH) across eight countries in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia, and compare sexual empowerment across these contexts.
methodsThis study leverages cross-sectional, population-based survey data collected among women of reproductive age in Burkina Faso (n = 4,012), Côte d’Ivoire (n = 2,278); Kongo Central, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC (n = 1,097)); Kinshasa, DRC (n = 1,143); Rajasthan, India (n = 4,004); Kenya (n = 5,454); Kano, Nigeria (n = 780); Lagos, Nigeria (n = 804); Niger (n = 2,286); and Uganda (n = 2,228) to validate eight sexual empowerment measures via confirmatory factor analysis. Overall scores of the validated measures were descriptively examined across settings.
findingsFinal models confirm the theoretical structure of the sexual empowerment measure, including two- dimensions: “existence of choice” and “exercise of choice”, each comprised of three items, with moderate internal consistency ranging from 0.59 to 0.69. Factor loadings, goodness-of-fit, and percent agreement varied in Rajasthan, India compared to sub-Saharan African settings. Marked variations were seen across sites in women’s perceptions of their partners’ responses to refusing sex, as well as their own confidence in voicing when and when not to have sex.
conclusionThis measure was developed in sub-Saharan Africa and works well for the population that it was designed to serve, however, cannot be extrapolated to other settings. To comprehensively capture the dynamic nature of sexual empowerment, future research is needed to examine measures across cultures and time. Validation across diverse settings opens avenues for holistic examination of positive sexual health, including factors that enhance women’s sexual empowerment and rights.
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.