Diese Präsentation wurde erfolgreich gemeldet.
Wir verwenden Ihre LinkedIn Profilangaben und Informationen zu Ihren Aktivitäten, um Anzeigen zu personalisieren und Ihnen relevantere Inhalte anzuzeigen. Sie können Ihre Anzeigeneinstellungen jederzeit ändern.
Evaluations of Gender-Integrated
Reproductive Health Interventions:
A Review of Measures and Designs
Brittany Schriver Isk...
Outline
• Background
• Study methods
• Summary of findings
• Conclusion
Background
Gender inequality is associated
with poor health outcomes
• Higher child mortality, stunting, and
wasting
• Low...
Aim
To conduct a systematic
review of peer-reviewed
articles on evaluations of
gender-integrated RH
programs with regard t...
Methods
Nested within larger systematic
review of peer-reviewed
articles
• English-language
• LMIC
• January 1, 2008—June ...
Methods
34 point futura and copy
• 24 point futura and copy
34 point gill sans mt and
copy
• 24 point gill sans mt and cop...
Methods
Abstracted data:
• Theory of change
• Study design
• Evaluation design
• Sampling
• Endline measures
• Gender inte...
Findings: Demographics
23 Studies
• 11 accommodating
• 12 transformative
Primarily in:
• sub-Saharan Africa
• South Asia
S...
Findings: Theory of Change
9 papers (39 percent)
explicitly discussed a
theory of change (ToC)
• Social Learning Theory
• ...
Findings: Study Design
Methods
• 61% (n= 14) quantitative
• 13% (n= 3) qualitative
• 26% (n=6) mixed methods
Sampling
• 87...
Findings: Gender Integration
Data collection
• Same-sex interviewers
• Time/place
Data analysis—sex
disaggreation
• 12 stu...
Findings: Measures
70 percent of
evaluations reported
including at least one
specific gender-
related outcome
• Only two s...
Conclusion
Mixed methods
Gender integration throughout
study design
Gender-sensitive measures
Photo by Kim Tyo-Dickerson
This presentation was produced with the support of the United States Agency for
International Development (USAID) under th...
Nächste SlideShare
Wird geladen in …5
×

Evaluations of Gender-Integrated Reproductive Health Interventions: A Review of Measures and Designs

503 Aufrufe

Veröffentlicht am

Presented by Brittany Schriver Iskarpatyoti at the 2016 AEA conference.

Veröffentlicht in: Gesundheit & Medizin
  • Login to see the comments

  • Gehören Sie zu den Ersten, denen das gefällt!

Evaluations of Gender-Integrated Reproductive Health Interventions: A Review of Measures and Designs

  1. 1. Evaluations of Gender-Integrated Reproductive Health Interventions: A Review of Measures and Designs Brittany Schriver Iskarpatyoti, MPH MEASURE Evaluation University of North Carolina, Chapel HiIl October 26, 2016 American Evaluation Association Conference Photo: David Snyder, ICRW
  2. 2. Outline • Background • Study methods • Summary of findings • Conclusion
  3. 3. Background Gender inequality is associated with poor health outcomes • Higher child mortality, stunting, and wasting • Lower maternal health care utilization, higher maternal mortality • Higher risky sex behavior • Gender-based violence (GBV) Gender norms and expectations affect family planning
  4. 4. Aim To conduct a systematic review of peer-reviewed articles on evaluations of gender-integrated RH programs with regard to: • Study design • Gender considerations in data collection and analysis • Gender measures
  5. 5. Methods Nested within larger systematic review of peer-reviewed articles • English-language • LMIC • January 1, 2008—June 30, 2013 • Evaluation • Outcome: RMNCH, HIV and other STIs, GBV, TB, universal health care • Gender-aware intervention Electronic database, sourced bibliography, organizational and conference website searches n=2,450 Titles reviewed and excluded n=709 Abstracts reviewed and excluded n=1545 Final peer-reviewed articles included in broader review n=99 Peer-reviewed and grey literature included in broader systematic review n=196 Grey literature excluded n=97 Abstracts reviewed n=1,741 Articles with RH as a primary outcome n=23
  6. 6. Methods 34 point futura and copy • 24 point futura and copy 34 point gill sans mt and copy • 24 point gill sans mt and copy Source: Interagency Gender Working Group (IGWG). 2013.
  7. 7. Methods Abstracted data: • Theory of change • Study design • Evaluation design • Sampling • Endline measures • Gender integration • Data collection • Data analysis • Outcome measure Photo by Arundati Muralidharan
  8. 8. Findings: Demographics 23 Studies • 11 accommodating • 12 transformative Primarily in: • sub-Saharan Africa • South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa 39% South Asia 26% Latin America and the Caribbean 18% Middle East and North Africa 13% East Asia and the Pacific 4%
  9. 9. Findings: Theory of Change 9 papers (39 percent) explicitly discussed a theory of change (ToC) • Social Learning Theory • Theory of Reasoned Action • Health Belief Model • Information-motivation- behavioral skills (IMB) model • Self-defined ToC Malawi male motivator project used the IMB model to impact FP use and couples’ communication.
  10. 10. Findings: Study Design Methods • 61% (n= 14) quantitative • 13% (n= 3) qualitative • 26% (n=6) mixed methods Sampling • 87% (n= 20) basic sampling information • 35% (n= 8) discussed power/calculations Endline • 17% (n= 4) included multiple endlines • 3 accommodating • 1 transformative 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Accomodating Transformative Study Designs Qual Quant Mixed
  11. 11. Findings: Gender Integration Data collection • Same-sex interviewers • Time/place Data analysis—sex disaggreation • 12 studies collected data from only one sex • 9 disaggregated data by sex • 2 no sex disaggregation
  12. 12. Findings: Measures 70 percent of evaluations reported including at least one specific gender- related outcome • Only two studies used validated gender scales/indices Common Gender RH Measures Express favorable/positive attitudes towards healthy sexuality Women's increased decision-making power Attitudes towards male participation/support Increased support (emotional, instrumental, family planning, or general support) from partners or community Increased gender-equitable attitudes and beliefs
  13. 13. Conclusion Mixed methods Gender integration throughout study design Gender-sensitive measures Photo by Kim Tyo-Dickerson
  14. 14. This presentation was produced with the support of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) under the terms of MEASURE Evaluation cooperative agreement AID-OAA-L-14-00004. MEASURE Evaluation is implemented by the Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partnership with ICF International; John Snow, Inc.; Management Sciences for Health; Palladium; and Tulane University. Views expressed are not necessarily those of USAID or the United States government. www.measureevaluation.org

×