Men are poorly integrated into sexual and reproductive health programmes, despite long-standing calls for their inclusion. From the 1994 Cairo International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) to the Policy Recommendations for the ICPD Beyond 2014, calls for 'rights for all' conflict with implicit, homogenising framing of men as patriarchal roadblocks to women's empowerment. This framing generates ambivalence about providing men's services, leading to emphasis on 'men as partners' supporting women's autonomous reproductive health decision-making rather than attention to both sexes' health needs. We argue that this framing also belies both the global rise of self-consciously non-traditional masculinities, and the fact that people's ostensibly individual sexual and reproductive health practices are profoundly relational. Here, we reimagine the concept of 'partnering' as an analytic for understanding how lived relationships influence both men's and women's sexual and reproductive practice. 'Partnering' in this sense is the context-dependent collaboration through which a range of gendered actors, not limited to male-female dyads, interact to shape health behaviour. We apply this approach to Mexican men's participation in a medical research on human papillomavirus transmission, demonstrating how spouses jointly refashioned male-focused health surveillance into familial health care and a forum for promoting progressive gender norms to their children and the broader society.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 September 2022.
All research outputs
#11,518,249
of 33,779,198 outputs
Outputs from Global Public Health
#800
of 1,495 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#94,721
of 271,848 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Global Public Health
#19
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,779,198 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 64th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,495 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 271,848 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
