nation, rural/urban) [73], single/multiple places [16], variety of context [27,41,54] like "real-world" or clinical [41], and any infrastructure needed [9,41]. Number of sessions/activities, how often activities were delivered [18,26,27,32,41,60], whether or not the frequency of activities was predetermined or varying [18], as well as the intensity or duration of each and every activity [7,18,20,41,42]. Organization(s)/agencies involved in delivering the programme activities [26,27] (name and variety) [27], quantity of staff and their responsibilities [16], staff characteristics like demographics, professions, expertise, education and technical expertise expected [7,eight,16,18,20,26,30,32,41,42,67,74,75]. Information on how programme employees was recruited, educated and supervised to deliver activities (when, how and by whom) [18,25,26,35,36]. Reflection regarding the relationship in between providers and participants, for instance irrespective of whether Ogs and drinking beer) interrupted by several periods when all participants knew the staff [8], influences of qualified opinions and the self-efficacy of providers[40]. Complexity 14. Standardisation 15. Innovation 16. Components Timing, duration, place 17. Timing (when) 18. Setting (exactly where)19. Dose and intensity (just how much) Providers/staff 20. Provider characteristics (Who)21. Provider/staff instruction 22. Provider reflexivityPLOS One particular | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0138647 September 29,11 /Systematic Critique of SRH Programme Reporting ToolsTable 2. nation, rural/urban) [73], single/multiple places [16], variety of context [27,41,54] for instance "real-world" or clinical [41], and any infrastructure essential [9,41]. Quantity of sessions/activities, how frequently activities were delivered [18,26,27,32,41,60], no matter if the frequency of activities was predetermined or varying [18], along with the intensity or duration of every single activity [7,18,20,41,42]. Organization(s)/agencies involved in delivering the programme activities [26,27] (name and kind) [27], quantity of employees and their responsibilities [16], employees traits which includes demographics, professions, practical experience, education and technical skills expected [7,eight,16,18,20,26,30,32,41,42,67,74,75]. Specifics on how programme staff was recruited, trained and supervised to provide activities (when, how and by whom) [18,25,26,35,36]. Reflection about the relationship in between providers and participants, for instance whether or not participants knew the staff [8], influences of skilled opinions as well as the self-efficacy of providers[40]. (Continued)8. Program manual 9. Implementation approach 10. Evaluation plans Piloting Programme implementation Content material 11. Piloting of activities 12. Components/activities13. Complexity 14. Standardisation 15. Innovation 16. Supplies Timing, duration, place 17. Timing (when) 18. Setting (where)19. Dose and intensity (just how much) Providers/staff 20. Provider traits (Who)21. Provider/staff coaching 22. Provider reflexivityPLOS A single | DOI:ten.1371/journal.pone.0138647 September 29,11 /Systematic Assessment of SRH Programme Reporting ToolsTable 2. title= JB.05140-11 (Continued) Domain Sub-domain Participants Item 23. Participant recruitment 24. Participants (to whom) Description Procedure of recruiting programme participants [18,71]. Qualities of participants that in fact received the programme [20,32,42,54,61,69]. Report subgroups by essential demographic elements including age, title= j.vaccine.2011.07.046 biological sex/gender, socioeconomic status, education level, religion [9,20,26?9,32,35,36,56,59], HIV status, and nr of sexual partners [27]. Note participant risk profiles, if any (e.g.

Twitch | Twitter