ArticleIndian journal of community medicine : official publication of Indian Association of Preventive & Social Medicine
"Barriers to Accessing Targeted Interventions among Key Populations in Jharkhand, India: A Mixed-Methods Study in Two Mining Towns".
Article in Indian journal of community medicine : official publication of Indian Association of Preventive & Social Medicine. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study investigates the barriers faced by key populations, men who have sex with men (MSM), transgender individuals (TGs), and female sex workers (FSWs), in two districts of Jharkhand in accessing healthcare services through targeted interventions (TIs). The objectives were to identify service delivery gaps, gain insights into participant experiences, and inform recommendations for improving healthcare access. Methods: A mixed-methods approach combining quantitative data collection was used. A total of 104 participants were surveyed by phone or in person, 30 of whom participated in FGDs. For qualitative data. The quantitative responses were scored on a five-point Likert scale for acceptability across the intervention's four dimensions: accessibility, approachability, availability, and appropriateness. SPSS was used for quantitative data analysis, whereas ATLAS.ti was used for qualitative data analysis. Statistical significance was set at Results: Stigma, discrimination, lack of awareness and infrastructural challenges were the key thematic areas revealed. Discrimination, particularly for TGs, was greater. Scoring on a Likert scale revealed a high level of acceptability; however, only gender was found to be statistically significant ( Conclusion: This study highlighted the need for culturally sensitive outreach, peer-based inclusion, and structural changes in health care settings. The findings provide actionable insights for policy makers to enhance inclusivity within national healthcare programs and address the unique challenges faced by key populations.
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.