Table 2

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Protocols and studies using any method that describes a programme or intervention, including the goals/objectives, setting, the target community or clients, and key activities
  • Reviews and commentaries.

  • Papers with very brief descriptions that would not add value as a data source (eg, ‘an empowerment intervention using community education approaches’).

Programmes that address power at any level of the social ecological model
  • Programmes whose sole outcomes were health behaviours.

  • Interventions that were reportedly based on well-known structural interventions (eg, stepping stones or image) but that did not describe any activities aiming to shift power relations.

  • Programmes that brought in powerful actors to affect change but that did not aim to affect changes in power relations (eg, programmes that used church leaders to increase uptake of male circumcision).

  • Articles that examined how SRH programmes unintentionally influenced power relations but that did not in themselves seek to address power (eg, a programme assessing possible increases in intimate partner violence due to a health behaviour intervention).

Cash transfer programmes that aimed to change power relations
  • Cash transfer programmes that aimed to address material deprivation only (eg, inability to pay school fees or to purchase food) rather than to change power relations.

  • SRH, sexual and reproductive health.