The first solution is peer instruction and it has been determined that teenagers aged 10 to 19 are almost grassed on sexual and reproductive health. This element's purpose is to provide students with the knowledge and skills essential to create informed opinions. As a result, it has also encouraged the underlying cause of all subsequent outcomes. Adolescent health days are community events that aim to raise awareness and improve the quality of preventative sexual and reproductive health services (World Health Organization, 2023). This conditioning can build on the knowledge passed down through peer instruction and inspire active participation and engagement from youth and their families. Adolescent-friendly health conferences have also been involved in the development of adolescent-friendly health conventions (Sharma et al., 2023). It has also been suggested that they be provided with necessary data such as infertile pads and contraceptives, and that they be staffed by those qualified to provide valuable knowledge, tutoring, and restorative services. This component has also been providing the factual services required to improve adolescent health outcomes.
Intermediate Outcomes
Increased SRH Knowledge and Access to Care
Adolescents will benefit from a variety of interventions aimed at increasing their awareness of sexual and reproductive health and improving their access to relevant health services (Salam et al., 2016). It has also included acquiring information about their health concerns and understanding where and how to get care (Haleem et al., 2021). Advanced SRH activities include increased knowledge and access to services, and teenagers are expected to exhibit healthier behaviours. It has also included knowledgeable opinions on their sexual health.
Primary Outcome
The program's ultimate goal is to minimise the rate of teenage pregnancy. It has also improved the general health and well-being of adolescents in the region. The program's goal has been to allow more young people to continue their education by minimising adolescent pregnancy (Sharma et al., 2023). Improving their unborn profitable potential has also promoted issues relating to health creation among adolescents (Salam et al., 2016a).
The intervention's sense model and change proposition have also been aimed at reducing adolescent pregnancies in Uttar Pradesh, India. On the other hand, it has also involved a number of critical restrictions. Contextual heterogeneity has played a vital role in tours like this and nonidentical cultural, commercial and social geographies across areas have also influenced the performance and event of the programme procurators. Another condition is behavioural pungency, which is related to the optimistic perceptions that learned knowledge has directly led to healthy actions, as personal, cultural, and societal influences greatly influence individual beliefs and behaviour (McLain, 2016). Resource constraints have also boosted the effectiveness of the intervention, which is strongly reliant on the continuous vacuity of trained labour manpower, accoutrements and financial brace.
Question 2: How to target adolescent groups?
Target group (Coverage)
Adolescents within the age ranges of 10-14 years and 15-19 years should be categorized by gender, locality (urban or rural), education status (in school or out of school), marital status (married or unmarried), and whether they belong to vulnerable or underserved groups, including “Scheduled Castes (SC)”, “Scheduled Tribes (ST)”, or those “below the poverty line (BPL)” (Barman, Mahanta and Barua, 2015). Potential data sources for this information include national census records, state education and urban development departments, and any specialized studies that may have been conducted.
Adolescent health status
To thoroughly assess adolescent health status in Uttar Pradesh, a comprehensive and multi-faceted data collection strategy is imperative, targeting various aspects of health and program implementation (Jain et al., 2022). The assessment involves collecting data on health outcomes across different sub-target groups, differentiated by age, gender, urban or rural status, education level, marital status, and socio-economic status, including specific attention to vulnerable or underserved groups like “Scheduled Castes (SC)”, “Scheduled Tribes (ST)”, and those “below the poverty line (BPL)”. The health outcomes to be assessed include nutrition; sexual and reproductive health; injuries and violence, with a specific focus on gender-based violence; substance misuse; and conditions predisposing to “non-communicable diseases (NCDs)” (Jain et al., 2022). These assessments will be both qualitative and quantitative, drawing on indicators provided by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.
For program-related data, the evaluation will assess the coverage and performance of ongoing programs, including “Adolescent Friendly Health Clinics (AFHCs)”, Weekly Iron and Folic Acid Supplementation (WIFS), “Menstrual Hygiene Scheme (MHS)”, family planning, maternal health, “Information Education and Communication (IEC)” activities, and State “AIDS Control Societies (SACS)”. This involves not just a qualitative assessment but also tracking program/service delivery indicators and past trends in expenditure against the budget. Where applicable, this assessment will be broken down by sub-target group and district to identify gaps, root causes of poor performance, and key success factors.
In terms of human resources, the assessment will focus on the details of AH-related human resources including dedicated counselors as well as health staff who have undergone AH-related training, their location of posting, and the training undergone (Lunt et al., 2011). This data will help quantify the number of counselors needed to operationalize all AFHCs at CHC, DH, and medical college levels. For AH program management, the details of dedicated AH staff at state and district levels and supportive supervision arrangements will be documented (Barua et al., 2020).
Additionally, the capacity of NGOs and “Self Help Groups (SHG)” at the district level, particularly in terms of suitability for managing peer education initiatives, will be evaluated (Chen et al., 2018). Besides that, initial scope of data collection also extends to donor-assisted “Adolescent Health (AH)” programmes in the state documenting objectives outputs, key activities, funds and other essential procedures. On the contrary, the health systems in the context of AH will be reviewed, focusing on the current status and key issues in terms of “HMIS/MCTS” in terms of AH-related indicators/AH disaggregated data, “IEC/BCC” while emphasising the AH, procurement and logistics, and ASHA/community processes related to any AH-related incentives.
This data will be analysed using a combination of theme dissection for qualitative data to uncover critical patterns and perceptivity and statistical dissection for quantitative data to track pointers and issues (Chen et al., 2018). A special emphasis will be placed on disaggregating data by demographic and geographic procurators in order to comprehend variances in adolescent health status and programme forcefulness. This comprehensive path aims to highlight areas of success and identify gaps or expostulations in adolescent health, providing a solid foundation for informed decision-making and programme enhancement.
Convergence
The initial goal for exacting the convergence of numerous health and development programmes related to adolescent health in Uttar Pradesh entails a difficult and multi-concentrated road (Upnrhm, 2022). Besides that, the initial goal is to identify and charge the status of programmes carried out by similar services such as Education for Women and Child Development and for Youth Affairs/Social Welfare in terms of their content, forcefulness, quality, and implicit community areas with the adolescent health programmatic frame. Education's “Adolescent Instruction Programme (AEP)”, Women & Child's “Integrated Child Development Services(ICDS)”, “Kishori Shakti Yojana(KSY)”, “Balika Samriddhi Yojana(BSY)”, Sabla, Saksham, and Youth Affairs/ Social Welfare's “Nehru Yuva Kendra Sangathan(NYKS)”, among others, may be among the programmes to be examined.
Both quantitative and qualitative data sources will be used for the following assessment. Quantitative sources include national and state-level surveys and databases such as the Census, “Sample Registration System (SRS)”, “Annual Health Survey/District Level Household and Facility Survey (AHS/DLHS)”, “National Family Health Survey (NFHS)”, “Health Management Information System (HMIS)”, and “Mother and Child Tracking System (MCTS)”. These provide statistical data on programs that cover different aspects of the demographic trends, health outcomes, and more. On the contrary, the qualitative sources involve discussions with a wide range of stakeholders including NGOs, experts, program beneficiaries, and officials from the relevant departments (Renn, 2015). Therefore, the following discussions will help understand the on-ground realities, experiences, and perceptions related to the programs, providing context and depth to the statistical findings.
The data collection will typically be carried out by both state and district planning teams, as certain types of data are likely to be available only at the district level. This decentralized approach ensures that local variations and needs are taken into account and it has been making the assessment more accurate and relevant to specific contexts.
Thematic analysis will interpret the qualitative data, extracting key themes and insights. Furthermore, these methods will provide a comprehensive understanding of the current status of program convergence, the potential for further integration, and the challenges that might need to be addressed (Petersen, Ahmed and Pavlidis, 2021). The ultimate goal of this assessment is to streamline and strengthen the network of programs addressing adolescent health, maximizing their collective impact and efficiency.
Aspect of Convergence
Data Collection Method
Source of Data
Justification
Coverage of programs by other departments (e.g., Education, Woman & Child, Youth Affairs/Social Welfare)
Document Review and Surveys
Program records, Census, SRS, AHS/DLHS, NFHS, HMIS, MCTS
Document review provides a comprehensive understanding of program scope and reach. Surveys fill in the gaps with recent and localized data. This aligns with the theory of change by ensuring that the foundational knowledge of program coverage is robust.
Effectiveness and Quality of Other Programs
Interviews and Focus Groups
Program beneficiaries, NGOs, experts
Qualitative insights from stakeholders provide depth to the understanding of program effectiveness and quality. This is essential for identifying successful strategies and areas needing improvement, which is a key component of the theory of change.
Areas of Synergy and Overlap
Stakeholder Meetings and Workshops
Representatives from various departments, NGOs, and community leaders
Facilitated discussions help identify and brainstorm potential areas of synergy and overlap. This collaborative approach ensures a comprehensive understanding of how different programs can align with the adolescent health initiatives.
Amenability and Bottlenecks to Convergence
Key Informant Interviews
Program administrators, healthcare providers, policy makers
Key informant interviews provide in-depth, expert insights into the structural and operational aspects of programs. Understanding bottlenecks and amenability to convergence is crucial for planning realistic and effective integrations, as outlined in the logic model.
Presentation and Approval of Findings
Reports and Presentation Meetings
Compiled data presented to DCAH/SCAH
Presenting synthesized data in a structured format to decision-makers is critical for moving forward with any strategic changes. It's a vital step in the theory of change, leading towards program improvement and ultimate outcomes.
Aspect
Data Collection Activity
Indicators
Source
Timing
Justification
Implementation of Peer Education
Observations & Attendance Records
Number of sessions, participant engagement, content delivered
Peer educators, participants
Throughout the program
Continuous monitoring ensures the fidelity of the implementation to the designed curriculum. Capturing participant engagement helps assess the effectiveness of delivery.
Surveys provide quantitative data on reach and satisfaction, while feedback forms give qualitative insights into participant experience and knowledge enhancement.
Utilization of Adolescent-friendly Health Clinics
Clinic Records & User Interviews
Number of visits, services used, user satisfaction
Health workers, adolescents
Ongoing
Clinic records provide objective data on utilization rates, while interviews offer personal insights into the quality and impact of services.
Changes in SRH Knowledge and Behaviors
Pre and Post Intervention Surveys
Levels of SRH knowledge, reported changes in behaviors
Adolescents
Before and after the program
Comparing pre and post-intervention data allows for direct measurement of change attributable to the program.
Community Attitudes and Support
Focus Groups & Key Informant Interviews
Community support, cultural attitudes, perceived barriers
Community members, leaders, families
Periodically
Understanding community context is critical for interpreting the success of the program and identifying areas for improvement.
Coordination and Synergy with Other Programs
Document Review & Stakeholder Meetings
Extent of collaboration, shared resources, joint activities
Program managers, partner organizations
Annually
Document review provides an official record of collaborative efforts, while meetings offer a platform for discussing and planning future synergies
A quasi-experimental design, specifically a non-equivalent groups design with pre and post-tests will be utilized (Wsu.edu, 2017). This design is selected due to the practical and ethical constraints of randomizing the intervention in real-world settings. The intervention group will be adolescents in districts where the program is implemented, compared to a control group of similar districts without the intervention. The design allows us to compare changes over time between the two groups, attributing differences to the intervention.
Indicators
The impact evaluation of the intervention in Uttar Pradesh focuses on reducing teenage pregnancies and improving adolescent sexual and reproductive health, hinged on three carefully selected indicators. The primary indicator is the Teenage Pregnancy Rate, quantified as the number of pregnancies per 1,000 females aged 15-19 in the intervention districts (World Health Organization, 2023b). This indicator is pivotal as it directly reflects the primary objective of the intervention, offering a clear, quantifiable measure of its success. This index's data will be culled from health clinic comments, checks, and quarterly health reports, ensuring a comprehensive comprehension of the impact on teenage gravidity. The first secondary index is Adolescents' Knowledge of “Sexual and Reproductive Health(SRH)”. This percentage-based measure examines teenagers' understanding of SRH, which is critical for making informed decisions and changing behaviours. It is an important stage in the unproductive chain leading to reduced gravidity, landing the forcefulness of peer education and health day elements of the intervention (World Health Organization, 2023b). The data will be collected through surveys administered to adolescents, providing direct insight into the program's knowledge impact.
The application of adolescent-friendly health care, as assessed by the rate of visits to adolescent-friendly health clinics for SRH services is an alternative secondary indicator (Mazur, Brindis and Decker, 2018). This metric is critical because it reveals whether the improved health clinics are successfully serving the target community, which is a direct result of the intervention's structure and indulgence-enhancing efforts. Data will be gathered from health clinic feedback and patient exit interviews which will provide both quantitative and qualitative insights into how clinic services are used and perceived (SAMHSA, 2022).
Each of these indicators has an unbreakable connection to the change proposition defined in the sense model, reflecting both the direct and moderate results expected from the intervention. They provide a comprehensive view of the impact, from the societal level of gestation classes to the individual level of knowledge and behaviour. They extend a strong framework for analysing the effectiveness of the intervention in real-world contexts, ensuring that the assessment is not only extensive but also intimately integrated with the program's objectives and revision proposition.
Implementation of Method
Sampling Strategy: The first step is to identify intervention and control districts that are demographically, socio-economically, and health-wise similar. This similarity ensures that the significant changes that have been observed can be more confidently attributed to the intervention rather than other external factors. On that account, in these districts, a representative sample of adolescents will be selected for participation in surveys to assess knowledge of sexual and reproductive health (SRH) (SAMHSA, 2022). Besides that, the representativeness will ensure the findings can be generalized to the wider population of adolescents in the district. On top of that, all health clinics within these districts will be included for gathering data on service utilization, providing a comprehensive view of the healthcare landscape.
Data Collection Plan: The data collection is strategically planned to provide a temporal view of the intervention's impact. On the contrary, the baseline data will be collected before the commencement of the intervention, establishing a starting point against which changes can be measured. Thereafter, the data will be collected annually over three years, allowing for the observation of trends and changes over time (Lebied, 2018). On that account, this longitudinal approach is also crucial for capturing the dynamics of the intervention's impact especially for indicators that might consume a significant amount of time to reveal the changes of teenage pregnancy rates. Therefore, the data sources are meticulously chosen to align with the indicators of health clinic records and district health reports will provide information on teenage pregnancy rates and service utilization. On the contrary, the surveys will be directly administered to adolescents to gather data on SRH knowledge.
Analytical Approach: The research will take a difference in outcomes approach, comparing the changes in pointers across time between the intervention and control groups (Garland and Little, 2018). This system is especially essential in non-randomized studies like this one since it aids in controlling for time-consistent unobserved variability between groups. Essentially, it allows for a clearer perspective of the intervention's follow-up by valuing trends in both groups. In addition, any disturbing circumstances associated with the birth will be checked out during the dissection (Garland and Little, 2018). This could be revisions in initial health programmes, profitable shifts, or other social programmes implemented concurrently, ensuring that reported changes in pointers can be more reliably linked to the intervention itself.
This rigorous and methodical approach to sampling, data gathering, and analysis assures that the impact evaluation provides dependable, valid, and perceptive results on the success of the intervention. The evaluation intends to expand a clear grasp of the intervention's influence on adolescent health in Uttar Pradesh by almost covering changes in critical points over time and likening these changes between groups with similar features (Haferkamp and Smelser, 2020). This comprehensive methodology is critical for directing future judgements on the program's longevity, adjustment, or scaling.
Assumptions and Limitations
The methodology assumes that the intervention and control groups are identical in terms of demographics, health indicators, and socioeconomic level at birth. This community is essential for incorporating observed changes into the intervention (Wing, Simon and Bello-Gomez, 2018). It is also believed that these groups will remain relatively stable throughout the trial, with no significant migration, demographic fluctuations, or changes in health-care procedures unrelated to the intervention. Another critical assumption is that no other significant interventions targeting the same outcomes are being implemented in the control districts during the study period. The presence of other interventions could confound the results, making it difficult to isolate the impact of the intervention under study.
The chosen quasi-experimental design, while practical and ethically suitable, is inherently more susceptible to confounding factors than a randomized controlled trial (Handley et al., 2018). There may be unobserved variables that differ between the intervention and control groups and change over time, affecting the outcomes. While difference-in-differences analysis helps control for some of these confounding factors, it cannot account for all of them, especially those that are not stable over time or not observed (Wing, Simon and Bello-Gomez, 2018).
Some indicators have been related to knowledge of SRH and it has been relying on self-reported data from surveys. Self-reported data can be subject to various biases have been including social desirability bias or recall bias. This reliance can introduce uncertainties in measuring the true changes in knowledge or behaviors.
Tired of juggling multiple assignments with no time left?
Don’t let academic pressure take a toll on your health. Opt for reliable Assignment Help services that prioritize your deadlines and academic goals. Get access to dedicated subject experts who craft custom-written assignments that boost your performance and free up your time for revision or relaxation.
References
Barman, P., Mahanta, T.G. and Barua, A. (2015). Social health problem of adolescent girls aged 15–19 years living in slums of Dibrugarh town, Assam. Clinical Epidemiology and Global Health, 3, pp.S49–S53. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cegh.2015.11.001.
Garland, J. and Little, D. (2018). Maternal Death and Its Investigation. Academic Forensic Pathology, 8(4), pp.894–911. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1925362118821485.
Haferkamp, H. and Smelser, N.J. (2020). Social Change and Modernity. [online] Cdlib.org. Available at: https://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft6000078s.
Handley, M.A., Lyles, C.R., McCulloch, C. and Cattamanchi, A. (2018). Selecting and Improving Quasi-Experimental Designs in Effectiveness and Implementation Research. Annual Review of Public Health, 39(1), pp.5–25.
Lebied, M. (2018). BI Blog | Data Visualization & Analytics Blog | datapine. [online] BI Blog | Data Visualization & Analytics Blog | datapine. Available at: https://www.datapine.com/blog/data-interpretation-methods-benefits-problems/.
Mazur, A., Brindis, C.D. and Decker, M.J. (2018). Assessing youth-friendly sexual and reproductive health services: a systematic review. BMC Health Services Research, 18(1). doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-2982-4.
Petersen, A.M., Ahmed, M.E. and Pavlidis, I. (2021). Grand challenges and emergent modes of convergence science. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 8(1). doi:https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00869-9.
Renn, O. (2015). Stakeholder and Public Involvement in Risk Governance. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 6(1), pp.8–20. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-015-0037-6.
Salam, R.A., Das, J.K., Lassi, Z.S. and Bhutta, Z.A. (2016a). Adolescent Health and Well-Being: Background and Methodology for Review of Potential Interventions. Journal of Adolescent Health, [online] 59(4), pp.S4–S10. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2016.07.023.
Salam, R.A., Faqqah, A., Sajjad, N., Lassi, Z.S., Das, J.K., Kaufman, M. and Bhutta, Z.A. (2016b). Improving Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health: A Systematic Review of Potential Interventions. Journal of Adolescent Health, [online] 59(4), pp.S11–S28. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2016.05.022.
SAMHSA (2022). Qualitative and Quantitative Assessment Methods. [online] www.samhsa.gov. Available at: https://www.samhsa.gov/workplace/employer-resources/assessment-methods [Accessed 4 Jan. 2024].
Upnrhm (2022). Uttar Pradesh National Health Mission. [online] upnrhm.gov.in. Available at: https://upnrhm.gov.in/Home/Rksk [Accessed 4 Jan. 2024].
Wing, C., Simon, K. and Bello-Gomez, R.A. (2018). Designing Difference in Difference Studies: Best Practices for Public Health Policy Research. Annual Review of Public Health, 39(1), pp.453–469. doi:https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040617-013507.
World Health Organization (2023a). Adolescent health. [online] World Health Organization. Available at: https://www.who.int/health-topics/adolescent-health [Accessed 4 Jan. 2024].
World Health Organization (2023b). Adolescent pregnancy. [online] WHO. Available at: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/adolescent-pregnancy.
Wsu.edu. (2017). 8.2 Non-Equivalent Groups Designs – Research Methods in Psychology. [online] Available at: https://opentext.wsu.edu/carriecuttler/chapter/non-equivalent-control-group-designs/.
