Search the repository

Abstract: Regional disparities in socioeconomic factors shape health-seeking behaviour (HSB). This study examined HSB across Northern and Southern Nigeria and the role of socioeconomic factors on HSB. Data was drawn from Wave 4 of the 2018/2019 post-harvest General Household Survey of approximately 5,000 households. Logistic regression and Chi-square (χ2) tests were applied. Findings show that health care is predominantly sought from private providers, especially in the South. No significant regional difference was found between formal and informal care use. Older adults rely on informal care providers such as traditional healers and faith-based centres. Household income significantly influences provider choice, while gender matters mainly in the North, where women utilise public more than private facilities. Longer distances and waiting times increase the likelihood of public facility use, and severe illness drives reliance on public providers. Policy should improve formal health care access for olderadults, strengthen public facilities to manage severe illnesses and women’s health, especially in the North, and tighten oversight of private providers, particularly in the South, to ensure quality health care. 
Keywords: health-seeking behaviour, formal and informal health care, public and private health care, Northern and Southern Nigeria
Published in RUP: 16.01.2026; Views: 159; Downloads: 2
Full text (298,28 KB)

Abstract: Materials and Methods: A representative sample of 444 participants completed online questionnaires at four time points: 2019 (wave 0), 2021 (wave 1), 2022 (wave 2), and 2023 (wave 3). Results: The results show significant changes in the levels of well-being and emotional loneliness over these periods. In particular, emotional loneliness increased during the pandemic, followed by a later decrease. Well-being appeared to increase after pandemic-related restrictions diminished but decreased again one year later. No significant changes concerning social loneliness and suicidal ideation were observed. 2.2. Participants A stratified sample of the general population of Slovenia was included in this study (see Section 2.1). A total of 1189 participants took part in the study at the baseline (wave 0). Subsequent waves (1–3) were marked by a level of dropout (see Figure 1), leading to the final number of 444 participants. The flowchart of the sample procedure is illustrated in Figure 1. The total dropout rate from wave 0 to wave 3 was 62.66%. Considering the whole sample, gender distribution did not change during this study. There were 211 (47.52%) female and 233 (52.48%) male participants. The age characteristics changed during the years, as the sample aged. These data are presented in Table 1. 2.4. Statistical Analysis Additionally, pairwise comparisons between social and emotional loneliness within each wave were performed using Bonferroni-adjusted post hoc tests. Multivariate tests were used to evaluate effect sizes (partial η2) for these comparisons.
Keywords: COVID-19, loneliness, mental health, well-being, suicide
Published in RUP: 22.12.2025; Views: 269; Downloads: 2
Full text (534,44 KB)
This document has more files! More...

Abstract: Background: Suicide underreporting undermines accurate public health assessments and resource allocation for suicide prevention. This study aims at synthesizing evidence on suicide underreporting and to estimate a global underreporting rate. Methods: We conducted a PRISMA-compliant systematic review on suicide underreporting, following a pre-registered protocol. A meta-analytical synthesis was also conducted. Quantitative data from individual studies was extracted to provide an overall global estimate of suicide underreporting (42 studies covering 71 countries out of the initial 770 unique studies, spanning 1900–2021). Most studies used retrospective institutional datasets to estimate underreporting through reclassification of undetermined deaths or comparisons across databases. Demographic and geographic disparities were also examined. Results: The 42 studies selected provided some quantitative data on suicide underreporting for general or specific populations. 14 of these studies provided data to be meta-analyzed. The global suicide underreporting rate was estimated to be 17.9% (95% CI: 10.9–28.1%) with large differences between countries with high and low/very low data quality. In this scenario, the last WHO estimates of suicide deaths – corrected for underreporting – would be more than one million (1,000,638; 95% CI: 859,511–1,293,006) and not 727,000 suicides per year. Underreporting was higher in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) with incomplete death registration systems, such as India and China (34.9%; 95% CI 20.3–53%), while high-income countries exhibited lower rates (11.5%; 95% CI 6.6–19.3%). Contributing factors included stigma, religiosity, limited forensic resources, and inconsistent use of International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes. Gender and age disparities were notable; Female suicides and those among younger or older individuals were more likely to be misclassified. Discussion: Addressing suicide underreporting requires improving death registration systems globally, particularly in LMICs. Standardizing ICD usage, improving forensic capacity, and reducing stigma are critical steps to ensure accurate data. Heterogeneity, geographical disparities, temporal biases, and invariance of suicide underreporting for countries with low-quality data demand further corroboration of these findings.
Keywords: misclassification, under-reporting, suicide, global burden, global health estimates
Published in RUP: 18.12.2025; Views: 268; Downloads: 3
Full text (1,67 MB)
This document has more files! More...

Abstract: Background and Objectives: The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) goes beyond the consequences of the infectious disease, especially as the measures taken to prevent the spread of the virus have had a very profound impact on people’s social relationships and everyday lives. Several studies have investigated these effects, but there is a lack of longitudinal studies in Central Europe. Objective: The aim of our study was to observe changes in well-being, loneliness, and suicidal behaviour before, during, and after the COVID-19 pandemic using the same population-based cohort. Materials and Methods: A representative sample of 444 participants completed online questionnaires at four time points: 2019 (wave 0), 2021 (wave 1), 2022 (wave 2), and 2023 (wave 3). Results: The results show significant changes in the levels of well-being and emotional loneliness over these periods. In particular, emotional loneliness increased during the pandemic, followed by a later decrease. Well-being appeared to increase after pandemic-related restrictions diminished but decreased again one year later. No significant changes concerning social loneliness and suicidal ideation were observed. Conclusions: Our study suggests that the COVID-19 pandemic changed the way in which people perceive their well-being and especially their relationships with others. From the data, we can conclude that people’s worldview is now lonelier than before the pandemic.
Keywords: COVID-19, loneliness, mental health, well-being, suicide
Published in RUP: 20.10.2025; Views: 424; Downloads: 7
Full text (624,62 KB)
This document has more files! More...

Abstract: Research Questions (RQ):What factors do men and women think influence the quality of their reproductive health? What differences exist between men and women in their perception of their own reproductive health? How do stigmas and taboos affect reproductive health?Purpose:The purpose of this research wasto examine the perspectives of men and women in the process of reproductive health care.Method:Qualitative method was used.Data was collectedfrom a purposive sample throughfourfocus groups. The data was analyzed using content analysis.Results:Results: three themes were identified through the qualitative analysis method: (1) reproductive health of men and women, (2) socio-cultural aspects of reproductive health, and (3) challenges of reproductive health. At the same time, 13 sub-themes were identified. The study showed that primary socialization has a significant impact on an individual's attitudes towards reproductive health in adulthood. It was found that women are more concerned about reproductive health than men. It was also found that stigmas and taboos, which prevent open discussion about reproductive health, have a major impact on the quality of reproductive health. This leads to lack of information, fear, discrimination and inequalities in access to healthservices.Organization:The research highlights the need for more education and emphasis on preventive care and reducing social exclusion and stigma related to reproductive health.Society:The results of the research contribute to a better understanding of men's and women's perceptions of reproductive health and how they think it is influenced by society. In this context, it also provides a better understanding of how stigmas and taboos affect reproductive health and how to seek help when reproductive health problems arise.Originality:The research provides insights into the specific nature of men's and women's reproductive health and how society views it. The originality of the research is that it offers a broad insight into how men and women understand reproductive health. It also provides an outline of the current state of reproductive health in society.Limitations/Future Research: The answers obtained from the participantsare subjective in nature and are subject to interpretation by the researchers. It would be useful to conduct quantitative type of studies in the future. Also, one of the limitations is related to the research sample, which includes a set of participantsfrom two Slovenian regions. In the future, it would be necessary to include participantsfrom the whole of Slovenia so that the results can be generalizedto the whole population.
Keywords: reproductive health, sexuality, society, taboos
Published in RUP: 28.09.2025; Views: 521; Downloads: 14
Full text (293,92 KB)
This document has more files! More...