English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Ivanova et al explored how vulnerable groups and principles of human rights are incorporated into national sexual and reproductive health (SRH) policies in 4 countries. They adapted the EquiFrame of Amin and colleagues of 2011, to SRH vulnerable groups which we believe could now be used for analysis of national SRH polices beyond those 4 countries. Although we fully agree with the authors' two main findings that vulnerable groups and human rights' principles are not sufficiently integrated in SRH policies nor granted the possibility to participate in the process of development in those four countries, we do believe that these shortcomings are not limited to those countries only nor to the identified vulnerable groups either. We are convinced that the issue of SRH as such is still framed within a very limited logic for all with vulnerable groups being perceived as an extra threat or an extra burden.

international journal of health policy and management

In Search of the Third Eye, When the Two Others Are Shamefacedly Shut? Comment on "Are Sexual and Reproductive Health Policies Designed for All? Vulnerable Groups in Policy Documents of Four European Countries and Their Involvement in Policy Development"