Skip to main content

Table 1 Theoretical frameworks, unit of analysis and propositions of the study

From: A socio-ecological perspective of access to and acceptability of HIV/AIDS treatment and care services: a qualitative case study research

Ecological model for health promotion or Socio-ecological model (McLeroy et al (1988)) Ecology of Human Development (Bronfenbrenner (1979)) Social-ecological Model (Dahlberg and Krug (2002)) Unit of analysis adapted and proposed Propositions of the study
Intrapersonal (biology, knowledge, self-concept, attitudes, etc.) Microsystem (individuals’ direct interaction with objects and related people) Individual (biological and socio-demographic factors) Client-based Client-based factors influence the acceptability of HATCS
Interpersonal (interactions with other people and groups) Mesosystem (interaction with groups and networks of people, i.e., peers and churches) Relationships (interaction with one or more people)   
Institutional (interaction with social institutions and structures) Exosystem (a factor indirectly influencing a person due to its influence on a related person)   Community Community-based factors influence access to and acceptability of HATCS
Community (interactions between organizations)   Community (schools, workplaces, neighborhoods, and other organizations) Institutional Institutional factors influence access to and acceptability of HATCS
Policy (laws, policies, standards, directives, implementation manuals, etc.) Macrosystem (policy and societal factors i.e., culture) Societal (policies, national economic performance, etc.) Policy and standards Policies and standards influence access to and acceptability of HATCS