Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Quantifying women’s empowerment has gained prominence as a research focus globally. We conducted a systematic review of the literature examining the measurement of women’s empowerment in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). The objectives of the study is to describe quantitative measurements of women’s empowerment based on individual-level data. We searched PubMed/Medline, Scopus and ScienceDirect databases, along with forward and backward citation tracking, for studies published between 2010 and 2025. The search yielded 1898 records, of which 98 studies met the inclusion criteria. All included studies were peer-reviewed, conducted either across multiple countries or within specific national contexts and analysed data from women of reproductive age. The review revealed considerable variations in the definition of women’s empowerment indicators, the conceptualization of dimensions and a general lack of consensus regarding what specific indicators were intending to measure. This review offers a comprehensive synthesis of the existing quantitative evidence on women’s empowerment measurement in SSA. Furthermore, the findings underscore that empowerment is inherently multidimensional, encompassing aspects such as women’s decision-making, control over resources and autonomy in sexual and reproductive matters. Importantly, the selection of dimensions and indicators is often constrained by the availability of relevant data.

Keywords

women’s empowerment sub-Saharan Africa measurement decision-making

Introduction

Discrimination that hinders women from attaining good health and achieve fulfilling lives occurs across various levels of society. These constraints are deeply connected to the limited power, influence, choices and autonomy available to women. In addition to promoting gender equality, empowering women is recognized as a key strategy for addressing poverty, hunger and disease, particularly among women in developing countries.

This literature review follows the definition and concept of empowerment by Kabeer¹ who defined empowerment as a transformative process whereby individuals acquire the ability and power that have been previously denied. This definition views empowerment as a dynamic and interconnected process that includes access to material, human and social resources (pre-conditions), the capacity to set and pursue personal goals (agency) and the realization of desired outcomes (achievement).² Recently, more than ever before, scholarly attention has turned to the subject of women’s empowerment. Proponents of women’s empowerment have highlighted its importance, not only as a human right but also to attain health and population goals.³ Empirically, there is a link between the Women’s empowerment and associated health outcomes, as well as lower fertility preference,⁴ family planning, children’s health and nutrition,^5–8 improvements in maternal health^6,9 contraceptive use¹⁰ and use of antenatal care.^11–14 Moreover, the quest to meaningfully measure women’s empowerment is becoming increasingly important in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) where development is lagging.

As women’s empowerment gains prominence in research across various regions, a wide range of measurement approaches has become increasingly common in the global development agenda. While such measures are important, scholars have struggled to agree on a universal metric to measure women’s empowerment. The adversity faced by scholars may be due to the different forms that empowerment can take, depending on the conditions relating to the individual and their environment. To enhance understanding of the challenges in measuring women’s empowerment, we conducted a systematic literature review examining how women’s empowerment has been measured in SSA and further aimed at summarizing the indicators based on individual-level data and methodologies used to derive them.

Theoretical framework

This study is grounded in liberal feminist theory, which advocates for comprehensive gender equality and the empowerment of women by promoting their access to public institutions and prioritizing women’s issues in national discourse.¹⁵ Liberal feminism emphasizes the importance of educational reforms and the implementation of appropriate legislation as key strategies to address gender disparities. These measures aim not only to reduce inequality between men and women but also to transform societal norms and beliefs.¹⁶

The initial measures of gender dimension of development were done in the 1990s via the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)’ gender related development index and gender empowerment measure drawing on Amartya Sen’s capability approach.¹⁷ Since then, various indices have been developed by different researchers using different methodologies to measure gender inequality and women’s empowerment.

Together with criticism of the UNDP global indices, the complexity of measuring empowerment emerged. According to Ewerling et al.¹⁷ and Asaolu et al.,¹⁸ empowerment is understood to possess several key characteristics: (i) it is a latent construct, meaning that observed behaviours serve only as proxies for an underlying phenomenon; (ii) it can be either intrinsic, reflecting internal agency or instrumental, serving as a means to an end; (iii) it may be universal or context-specific, varying across cultural and social settings; (iv) it can be achieved individually or collectively, indicating that empowerment operates at multiple levels, including the individual, household, community and national levels; (v) it spans various dimensions such as familial, economic, psychological, socio-cultural, legal and political each offering a different lens of application; and (vi) its assessment depends on what is being measured, who is doing the measuring (self-assessment or external evaluation) and the methodology employed, whether qualitative or quantitative.

Numerous indicators were used to capture the complex and multidimensional construct, encompassing various indicators, along with various conditions and factors that influence it. Kishor and Gupta¹⁹ argued that in addition to the indicators of evidence of empowerment, indicators pertaining to access to potential sources for empowerment as well as indicators for setting for empowerment is crucial in operationalizing women’s empowerment. Many of these indicators, particularly those related to women’s empowerment, have been incorporated into nationally representative Demographic and Health Surveys (DHSs). Key indicators of women’s status and empowerment commonly used in national surveys include: literacy and educational attainment; employment status and type of occupation; control over personal earnings; age at first marriage and first birth; contraceptive use; spousal age and education differences; participation in household decision-making; attitudes towards wife-beating; beliefs about a woman’s right to refuse sex with her husband; and barriers women face in accessing healthcare for themselves. In certain countries, additional questions were included to empowerment measures such as autonomy in spouse selection, support from the natal family, ownership of assets, financial decision-making for different purposes, awareness and participation in microcredit initiatives, attitudes towards gender roles, freedom of movement, membership in formal or informal associations and access to banking services.

Materials and methods

Search strategy

We conducted an electronic database search for articles on women’s empowerment on 10 May 2023, with an update completed on 10 June 2025. The databases included PubMed, Scopus and ScienceDirect. The following search terms were used individually and in various combinations: ‘female empowerment’, ‘women’s empowerment’, ‘women empowerment’, ‘women’s autonomy’ and ‘sub-Saharan Africa’ to identify research studies published between 2010 and 2025. The search strategy also incorporated a manual search to identify additional relevant research on the same topic.

Inclusion criteria

In this systematic literature review, studies were considered eligible if they were (i) published in the English language between 2010 and 2025; (ii) applied quantitative analysis; (iii) examined female/women’s empowerment either as an independent variable or dependent variable and described how it was measured; (iv) conducted or analysed data from countries in the SSA region and (v) that relied upon individual level data. The research titles and abstracts were evaluated against these inclusion criteria.

All studies that met the inclusion criteria were imported to Rayyan (a web application designed to facilitate the screening process for researchers working on systematic reviews, scoping reviews and other literature review projects) and duplicates were removed followed by the manual revision. At the first stage of study selection, titles and abstracts of the remaining articles were independently screened by two reviewers (IS and OO). To ensure the quality of the assessment, each study was critically appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist (Supplemental Table S2). The appraisal focused on key aspects including the validity of the study design, methodology and reported results. Based on these criteria, each study was rated as having a high, moderate or low risk of bias. In the event of conflicts over inclusion, a third reviewer (LK) was involved for resolution. The full texts of the articles that satisfied the inclusion criteria were obtained and examined, while articles that did not fit the inclusion criteria were excluded. Articles with uncertain eligibility were retained for full-text review. The articles selected in the previous screening phase were reviewed in full, and relevant data were manually extracted and independently recorded in a structured spreadsheet by each of the three reviewers. The key information extracted from each article included authorship, title, study location, data, participant details, women’s empowerment and measures of women’s empowerment. Moreover, reference lists of the included studies were screened for further relevant documents. Any disagreements regarding article inclusion were resolved through consensus. All analyses were based on previously published articles; therefore, no ethical approval or patient consent was required.

Results

Search results

The search yielded a total of 1898 publications across all databases used. After removing duplicates, 1846 articles were screened based on title and abstract, of which 1682 were excluded. A total of 164 full-text articles were then assessed for eligibility, leading to the further exclusion of 74 articles. These 74 articles were excluded with reasons such as (i) irrelevant women’s empowerment (WE) measure due to the usage of non-WE oriented indexes, (ii) insufficient data due to the lack of explanation on how WE was measured in their study and (iii) qualitative studies of WE phenomenon rather than quantifying it. This resulted in 90 publications being included in the review. Additionally, the manual searching identified eight more articles. Therefore, the final number of publications included in this review was 98, as shown in Figure 1. Supplemental Table S3 shows the characteristics of the 98 studies included in this review. Of the 98 publications included, 95.9% (n = 94) were rated as having a low risk, while 4.1% (n = 4) were rated as having a moderate risk (Supplemental Table S2).

Figure 1.

Flowchart of the study selection procedure.

Study characteristics

All selected publications were published as peer-reviewed papers and proposed women’s empowerment measures based on data collected at the individual level measures. Of the 99 publications, 78.6% (n = 77) relied on data exclusively from the nationally representative DHSs, 3.1% (n = 3) used DHSs data with the Indian National Family Health Survey,²⁰ DHS together with Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS)^21,22 and the remaining 18.4% (n = 17) were based on other surveys or primary data sources. In addition to studies conducted in SSA countries, the analyses also included five publications^20,23–26 that drew on data from both SSA and other low-and middle-income countries. Approximately 55.1% (n = 54) of the publications were based on data from individual countries within the region namely: Uganda,^10,27–29 Nigeria,^6,30–35 Ethiopia,^13,36–45 Benin,⁴⁶ Zambia,⁴⁷ Kenya,^48–51 Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC),^52,53 Burkina Faso,^54,55 Namibia,⁵⁶ Zimbabwe,^57,58 Sierra Leon,^42,59 Ghana,^60–65 Mozambique,^66,67 Cameroon,^14,68 Tanzania,^69,70 Rwanda,^71,72 Chad²² and the Gambia.⁷³ The remaining 44 studies^{4,7–9,11,12,18,20,21,23–26,33,74–103} utilized pooled data from multiple SSA countries, allowing for comparative analyses across countries within the region and, in some cases, beyond.

Given the specific survey design, most DHS-based publications analysed the empowerment of women of reproductive age (15–49 years). However, two studies diverged from this: one focused on women aged 35 years and above,⁴ and another on women aged 20–49 years.⁷⁰ Four studies specifically targeted rural-based married or partnered women,^34,44,60,90 while one study centred on urban-based women.³¹ Seven studies^{43,52,62,86,89,97,99} examined women with children under the age of 5 and two studies analysed responses from couples.^9,48 One study²³ utilized data from the World Bank Annual Report and applied global indices developed by the United Nations, that is, the gender gap index, gender equity index and social institutions and gender index. As a result, the study did not involve a specific population sample. The characteristics of the publications and the corresponding reference are presented in Tables 1 and 2.

Table 1.

Characteristics of the publications proposing a women’s empowerment measure (n = 98).

Characteristics	DHS-based publications	DHS and other surveys	Other surveys incl. primary data-based publications
Publication type	• Peer-reviewed papers^{7–12,14,18,25–27,29,32,33,35,36,40,41,43,45,49,50,52,56–60,62–64,67–80,82–94,96–106}	• Peer-reviewed papers^20–22	• Peer-reviewed papers^{6,13,23,30,31,34,37,39,42,44,46–48,51,53,54,65,95}
Study location	• Multiple countries (two or more) from different • region^24–26 • Multiple sub-Saharan publications^{4,7–9,11,12,18,33,74–94,96–103} • Sub-Saharan country specific publications ○ Uganda^27–29 ○ Nigeria^32,33,35 ○ Ethiopia^{36,38,40,41,43} ○ Kenya^49,50 ○ DRC⁵² ○ Burkina Faso⁵⁵ ○ Namibia⁵⁶ ○ Zimbabwe^57,58 ○ Sierra Leon^59,105 ○ Ghana^10,60–64 ○ Mozambique^66,67 ○ Cameroon^14,68 ○ Tanzania^69,70 ○ Rwanda^71,72 ○ Chad²² ○ Gambia⁷³	• Multiple countries (two or more) from different regions²⁰ • Multiple sub-Saharan studies²¹ • Sub-Saharan country specific studies ○ Chad²²	• Multiple countries (two or more) from different regions²³ • Multiple sub-Saharan studies⁹⁵ • Sub-Saharan country specific publications ○ Nigeria^6,30,31,34 ○ Ethiopia^{13,37,39,42,44,45} ○ Benin⁴⁶ ○ Zambia⁴⁷ ○ Kenya^48,51 ○ DRC⁵³ ○ Burkina Faso⁵⁴ ○ Ghana⁶⁵
Population	• Married/partnered women aged 15–49 years^{7,8,12,18,24,25,27,31,36,38,45,49,50,55,61,63,64,69,72–77,80,88,92,93,96,98,100,104–106} • Women 15–49 years^{10,14,26,28,29,32,33,35,40,41,56,58,59,66,67,71,78,79,81,85,87,91,94,101–103} • Women 15–49 with children <5 years^{43,52,62,86,89,98,99} • Women 20–49 years⁷⁰ • Women 35 years and above⁴⁹ • Rural-based married/partnered women 15–49 years^60,90 • Married/partnered women aged 15–49 and men aged 15–59 years^9,48	• Married/partnered women aged 15–49 years^20–22	• Married/partnered women aged 15–49 years^{6,34,39,42,44,95} • Women 15–49 years^{13,30,37,46,51,53,65} • Women 15–49 years with children <5 years^47,48,54 • Rural-based women 15–49 years^34,44 • Urban-based women aged 15–49³¹

DHS: Demographic and Health Survey; DRC: Democratic Republic of Congo.

Table 2.

Measures of women’s empowerment in SSA, indicators and publications.

Dimensions/domains	Sub-dimension/sub-domain	Women’s empowerment indicators and publications
Familial/interpersonal empowerment	Decision-making or women autonomy (n = 74)	Person who decides on respondents’ healthcare, on large household purchases, daily household purchases and on visit to family or relatives^{9,13,30,74,102}; person who decides on respondent’s own income, husband income spending, respondent’s healthcare, household earnings and household purchases and visiting family^{27,50,52,71,79,80,82,85,92}; person who decides on respondent’s healthcare, on large household purchases, on visit to family or relative^{8,12,14,22,31,32,34,36,44,55,59,63,66,67,70,72,78,88,93,94,104}; decision-maker on respondents use of contraceptives, responder’s healthcare, large household purchases, daily household purchases and visit to family²⁰; decision-maker on respondent’s healthcare, major household purchases, spending respondent money and visiting relatives^{7,10,28,29,51}; decision-maker on members of household’s healthcare, regarding decisions on kids’ schooling and regarding whether to have another child or not⁴⁶; decision-making power³⁷; person who decide on respondent’s healthcare, large household purchases, schooling children and healthcare of children⁴⁷; decision-maker on large household purchases, purchase of daily household needs, visiting female partner’s family or relatives, spending the money female partner earns and own heathcare/how many children to have⁴⁸; person who decides on respondent’s healthcare, on larger household purchases, on visit to family or relatives and on household finances³⁸; decision-maker on spending of household income⁸¹; decision-maker on use a contraceptive method and have another child, she to consult a doctor, when she was pregnant and what to do when a child was sick, she contributed to use a contraceptive method and to decision to have another child⁵⁴; decision-maker on respondent’s healthcare, large household purchases, money husband earn and visiting family or relatives^{24,40,69,84,86}; decision-maker on respondent’s healthcare and purchase of household goods^{21,41,43,45,64,89,91,97–101,103}; decision-maker on respondent’s earning, on husbands earning, on household purchases, decision on visiting family, healthcare, contraceptive use, personal of family health and on using a condom if husband has STD⁵⁷; decision-maker on visiting family/relatives, healthcare, household purchases and household earning⁸³; permission to get medical help, getting money for treatment, wanting to go alone to health centres, on respondent healthcare, on large household purchases, on visit to family or relatives on what to do with husband earnings¹¹; decision-maker on respondent’s healthcare, house earning, household purchases and visiting family members^60,61,87,105; decision-maker on large household purchases, own health, going to public meetings⁴²; decision-maker on large household purchases, small household purchases, visit family, deciding when and where to seek medical health⁶; decision-maker on expenditure of woman earning, partners income, large household purchases, healthcare and visit relatives⁶⁸; person who decides on large household purchases, contraceptive use and self-earnings⁷³; decision-maker on large household purchases, daily purchase, medical purchases, clothes purchases⁹⁵; decision-maker on healthcare and purchase of household goods^58,96; decision-maker on large household purchases, daily purchases, healthcare, buying clothes and how partners earning will be used⁵³; decision-maker on daily purchases, large household purchases, can refuse sex, permission to health facility and visit family and friends⁶⁵; decision-maker on woman’s healthcare, significant household purchases, daily household needs, visits to family or relatives, daily food choices and allocation of her partner’s earnings²⁶.
	Financial autonomy (n = 2)	Respondents earn income, own saving, spending cash earnings and have influence on husband income³⁹; respondent have savings, access to financial information and financial goals.⁹⁵
	Familial/interpersonal (n = 2)	Respondent’s control over domestic decision-making, control over sexual relations, marriage, fertility, contraception, health-seeking behaviour and attitudes regarding domestic violence⁷⁵; decision-maker on healthcare, major household purchases, daily household needs, visiting relatives, money husband earns, refuse to have sex-husband has STD, have other women, if tired/not in the mood, on use of condom if husband has STD, decision-maker on contraceptive use, husband knows she is on contraceptives.⁵⁶
	Socio-familial (n = 7)	Freedom of mobility, control of own health, free of domestic violence⁷⁶; decision-making power⁴⁶; decision-making regarding family visits, women’s own health and attitude towards domestic violence⁶²; attitude towards violence, household decision-making, life course indicator, land and home ownership¹⁰⁶; household decision-making, attitude towards violence, age of cohabitation and first birth³³; earning gap.²⁶
	Partner prohibition (n = 2)	Respondent prohibited from working outside home, visit from people, visit friends, visit family, using phone⁶; prohibited from using contraceptives.³⁰
	Access to healthcare (n = 12)	Women’s ability to refuse sex or ask a partner to use condoms^4,18,33,106; getting help permission for medical help, money for treatment, distance to a health facility, not wanting to go alone for medical help^{11,24,40,55,69}; access to healthcare⁹⁰; distance to family, getting medical help⁷⁰; sexual and reproductive health, control over healthcare.²⁵
	Mobility (n = 4)	Respondent requires permission to go to the market, to health centre and to visit friends⁴⁶; Decision to visit family or relatives, healthcare and social affairs³⁹; Partner influence⁵³; Freedom of movement.¹³
	Family (n = 1)	Age at first birth, age at first sex, decision on household purchases, decision on contraceptive use, visiting family, respondents’ healthcare, heard of family planning on radio, heard of family planning on TV, read family planning on newspaper.⁴
	Material environment (n = 1)	Control over household purchases, control over earning.²⁵
	Social relationships (n = 1)	Autonomy in social relationships, freedom of association.²⁵
Socio-cultural/psychological empowerment	Attitudes towards wife beating/justifying violence (n = 76)	Beating justified if wife goes out, neglect children, argues with him, burns food^9,27; who decided whether they could visit their family and relatives⁷⁵; beating justified if wife goes out, neglects children, argues with him, refuses sex, burn food, suspected of unfaithful, refuses to have another child^6,30; beating was justified if the wife went out without permission of husband, neglected the children, argued with husband, refused sex with husband or burned the food^{7,8,11,12,14,20,24,40,42,55–57,60,61,66,67,69,73,78,79,82,83,85,87,92,94,102,105}; Beating justified if wife goes out, neglect children, argues, refuses sex, burn food, had sex outside marriage, wife justified refusing sex if husband have sex with other women and to ask for condom if husband has STD^50,80; equal effectiveness of boys and girls at school, reports on female genital mutilation, changing socio-cultural things in the community³⁷; attitude towards violence, household decision-making, life course indicator, land and home ownership^18,38,106; beating justified if wife neglects children, refuse to have sex, burn food^{21,41,43,45,64,72,81,89,91,96–101,103}; beating justified if wife goes out without telling husband, neglect children, refuse sex⁸⁴; decision-making regarding family visits, women’s own health and attitude towards domestic violence under five scenarios⁶²; household decision-making, attitude towards violence, age of cohabitation and first birth³³; women’s perception and experience of violence and abuse⁸⁶; women attitude towards violence⁹⁰; beating justified if wife goes out without telling husband, if she neglects the children, if she burn the food and if she argues with the husband⁷⁰; agreement on beating justified – by any reason or excuse, to have sex with partner, ever been through unwanted – sexual intercourse with partner, nonintercourse acts by partner.⁵⁸
	Socio-cultural or self-esteem (n = 5)	Who decided whether they could visit their family and relatives⁷⁵; self-esteem indicators³⁷; education, frequency of listening to radio, reading a newspaper⁴; attitude towards violence, household decision-making, life course indicator, land and home ownership⁴⁹; locus of control, self-esteem.¹³
	Attitudes towards refusing sexual intercourse/sexual empowerment (n = 9)	Respondent can refuse sex, when husband has STD, has other women, has recently given birth, tired or not in mood⁹; if husband has STD, has intercourse with other women, tired not in mood²⁰; women’s ability to refuse sex or ask a partner to use condoms^{11,29,66,67,71,78}; control over sexuality.⁵³
	Physical integrity (n = 1)	Acceptance of physical violence and intimate partner violence.²⁵
	Free from spousal violence (n = 1)	Ever physical, emotional, economic and sexual violence.³⁹
	Influencer (n = 4)	Attitudes towards wife beating.^34,35,59,93
	Leadership (n = 1)	Sense of self and confidence.⁴⁶
Economic Empowerment	Economic or economic freedom (n = 20)	Income contribution relative to husband, decision on how each partners income would be used and decision about major and daily household purchases⁷⁵; ownership to property²⁷; income generation, control over finance⁷⁶; access to money of her own³⁰; income generation, control over finance⁷⁷; work status, relationship household head, control over earning and land ownership¹⁰; afford fruits and vegetable, own clothes own beauty purchase⁴⁶; income generating by women, asset ownership³⁷; working, type of earning, own a house, own land^4,57; respondent employed, deciding on spending money, amount of earning⁵⁶; women worked in the last 12 months, who does woman work for, the type of earnings from woman’s work, type of occupation, work all years¹¹; control over women’s income, decision-making on large household purchases, women’s ability to work outside home⁶²; work/labour force participation, legal status³³; respondent worked, own land and own house⁶⁸; women’s owning of a house, land and the type of earning from her work^29,71; participation in income activity^86,90; cash earnings.⁴⁴
	Labour force participation (n = 18)	Occupation, type of earning, seasonality of occupation and income ratio^4,18,106; respondents currently working.^{13,14,24,26,28,51,60,73,79,82,83,94,102,105}
	Access to or control over resources/resources (n = 7)	Ownership of major durable items, land and house³⁹; seasonality, income relative to partner⁸⁴; land ownership, ownership of productive assets, having independent source of income and making household purchase using their income⁵¹; occupation, having a mobile phone etc.^34,35,59,93
	Property ownership (n = 7)	Respondent own land and respondent own a house.^{11,40,44,61,69,70,92}
Human and social assets	Human and social assets (n = 5)	Schooling attainment, age at first sex, age at first cohabitation, age at first birth, spousal age difference, spousal schooling difference, spousal earning difference, first sex at marriage, work for cash or in-kind^41,80; age at first sex, age at first cohabitation, age at first birth⁷; women’s education level, women’s occupation and age at first marriage.^72,73
	Family (n = 1)	Age at first birth, age at first sex, decision on household purchases, decision on contraceptive use, decision to visiting family, decision on respondents’ healthcare, heard of family planning on radio, heard about family planning on TV, read about family planning from newspaper.⁴
	Education/social independence/socio-economic status (n = 26)	Educational attainment^{31,44,51,73,90}; literacy, highest education level and spousal difference in educational attainment^18,33,49,106; highest education, ability to read a sentence⁵⁷; worked in last 12 months, age at cohabitation, age at first birth and age difference between wife and husband^{21,41,43,45,64,89,91,96–101,103}; highest education level, frequency of reading newspaper, frequency of watching TV, frequency of internet use, respondent has a bank account, own a mobile phone, employment, own a phone, frequency of watching TV, frequency of reading newspaper, type of earning and educational attainment⁶⁹; member in community groups.⁴⁴
	Knowledge level or exposure to media or awareness (n = 14)	Listening to radio, reading newspaper/magazine, watching TV and educational level^{60,79,82,83,85,87,94,102,105}; unmet need, heard family planning on radio, heard family planning on TV, read about family planning on print media or text message, knowledge about contraceptive methods¹¹; watching TV, reading newspaper or magazine, listening to the radio, heard about family planning on the radio, heard family planning on TV, from newspapers²⁴; women’s ability to have the opportunity to read a newspaper or a magazine, listen to the radio and watch TV.^29,71
	Age at critical events/reproductive self-determinations (n = 2)	Age of the respondent at first cohabitation and age at first birth.^58,69
Others	Legal (n = 5)	Legal rights over land and houses^76,77,86; knowledge of women legal rights³⁷; women’s judicial and legislative entitlements over land and over house ownership.⁶²
	Political/non-family group membership (n = 2)	Member of a non-family group⁴⁶; political representation.³⁷
	Male involvement (n = 1)	Help from adult male.⁴⁶
	Spousal communications (n = 1)	Domestic activities, expenses, child health, nutrition, personal health.⁵⁴
	United Nation global indices (n = 1)	Gender gap index, GEI and SIGI.²³

GEI: gender equity index; SIGI: social institutions and gender index; SSA: sub-Saharan Africa; STD: sexual transmited diseases.

Women’s empowerment measures

Measuring women’s empowerment is inherently complex. This is reflected in the fact that all publications consistently acknowledged its multidimensional nature, highlighting that empowerment encompasses various overlapping and context-specific domains. The review revealed varying terminology used to describe its components of empowerment. Terms such as empowerment areas, components, dimensions, domains, indicators, indices, measures and variables were used interchangeably. Notably, there is no established consensus on the hierarchical structure or comparability of these terms across selected studies.

In Table 2, we listed dimension/domains along with the corresponding variables, as assigned by the study authors. For ease of presentation, the various sub-dimensions were grouped into four overarching dimensions: familial/interpersonal, socio-cultural/psychological, economic and human and social assets empowerments. An additional category, termed others, was used for sub-dimensions that did not fit neatly into the four overarching dimensions. The average number of dimensions used to measure women’s empowerment was 3.3, ranging from a single dimension, primarily based on DHS-derived decision-making/women autonomy indicators^{22,32,38,47,52,63,65,74,104} to 11 dimensions in studies utilizing primary data.¹³

The most commonly used dimension of women’s empowerment, identified in 76 studies, was socio-cultural/psychological empowerment. This dimension was commonly measured through a set of questions assessing whether a woman believes a husband or partner is justified in beating his wife under specific circumstances. These scenarios typically included: going out without the husband’s permission, neglecting the children, arguing with the husband, refusing sex or burning the food. This construct, referred to variously as attitudes towards violence, perceptions of violence, violence against women or attitudes towards wife-beating, were used in 28 studies,^{7,8,10–12,14,20,24,40,42,55–57,60,61,66,69,73,78,79,82,83,85,87,92,94,102,105} making it the most consistently applied set of indicators for this dimension.

The familial/interpersonal empowerment, focusing on women’s decision-making power or women’s autonomy was the second most reported subcategory of women’s empowerment used in 74 publications. While certain studies have categorized dimensions such as financial autonomy,^39,95 partner prohibition^6,30 and access to healthcare,^{11,18,24,40,49,55,69,106} etc. the variables within these domains predominantly capture women’s decision-making capacities and their dependence on partners for issues pertaining to their own well-being and that of household members.

Most publications (n = 25) in this dimension combined two or three variables of decision-making mostly found in the DHS questionnaire such as the person responsible – respondent’s healthcare, on large household purchases, on visit to family or relatives.

Other notable categories included education/social independence, addressed in 26 studies and economic empowerment and labour force participation, which were collectively featured in 28 publications. Additionally, knowledge level was examined in 14 studies, while access to healthcare indicators appeared in 12 studies. All remaining sub-dimensions and subdomains were covered in fewer than 10 publications. Rather than developing their own measures, several studies employed established frameworks such as the African-based Survey-Based Women’s Empowerment Index (SWPER),^{21,41,43,64,89,91,97–99,101,103} the updated version SWPER global^45,100 and the Harvard Gender Roles Framework.^35,59,93

Discussion

This study provided a comprehensive appraisal of evidence describing women’s empowerment measures in SSA. The findings from this study help to paint a complete picture of the complex women’s empowerment measurement in relation to gender and development monitoring in the region. The literature review revealed a great heterogeneity of definitions and dimensions of women’s empowerment which constitute a challenge in defining a measure suitable for comparison across population and over time.

Despite satisfying interest in the subject, many studies involved DHS data which indicate the importance of the survey to women’s empowerment measurement construct. The results revealed that the majority of DHS-based studies used data collected from mostly East and West African countries. Although some studies that focused on MICS data included Southern African countries, country-specific studies from within the region were limited. Identified studies were conducted in the DRC,^52,53 Mozambique,^66,67 Namibia,⁵⁶ Tanzania,⁶⁹ Zambia⁴⁷ and Zimbabwe.^57,58 The relatively low number of studies from Southern Africa may be attributed to the prioritization of other regions (east and west Africa) by international and regional development agencies, often based on perceived developmental needs, larger population sizes, higher fertility rates and greater health burdens.

The DHS datasets play a pivotal role in providing a standardized measurement which are beneficial for comparing various populations in diverse cultures. However, context-specific measures can provide opportunities to reflect women’s life experiences in the contexts in which they live.¹⁰⁵ Such studies, in particular the ones that applied primary data provided additional indicators to the measure which is not available in the DHS standard questionnaire. Moreover, the degree of women’s empowerment is affected by numerous elements at various intrapersonal, interpersonal and ecological levels. Hence, social, economic and cultural systems are (very) crucial in defining the boundaries of empowerment in specific contexts. Other factors, such as the availability and accessibility of health services, women’s position in society and the cultural expectations of women, effectively influence women’s empowerment regardless of their individual or household characteristics.

Household decision-making, attitudes towards violence and control over sexual relations were the most frequent measures of women’s empowerment used in the reviewed studies of this systematic review. This is not surprising, as women’s decision-making was one of the earliest ways of operationalizing women’s empowerment, on which the DHS – commonly used dataset for women’s empowerment measures – is based. The frequent use of decision-making and attitudes towards violence as core domains of women’s empowerment in SSA is contextually appropriate, given the prevailing cultural norms and patriarchal systems that have historically excluded women from decision-making processes and often justified violence as a means of enforcing culturally prescribed gender roles and behaviours.

This systematic review study had several potential limitations. Firstly, most of the research studies reviewed in this study used data from the DHS, which exclude never-married women as a focus of their study. Secondly, only a few studies included matched couples or male perspectives on women’s empowerment and fertility preferences. Collecting information from both partners and analysing it can provide the opportunity to account for men’s characteristics and opinions on women’s empowerment.

Conclusion

This systematic review provided a comprehensive synthesis of the available quantitative evidence of women’s empowerment measurement in SSA. It revealed considerable variations in the definition of women’s empowerment indicators, the conceptualization of dimensions and a general lack of consensus regarding what specific indicators were intending to measure. The most frequently employed dimensions in the measurement of women’s empowerment included decision-making authority, attitudes towards gender-based violence and control over sexual relations. Moreover, this review confirms that measuring empowerment is multidimensional, spanning women’s decision-making and control over resources and sexuality. It is noteworthy that qualitative research is essential for defining the various dimensions of women’s empowerment and outlining the ways in which women may be more empowered. However, the choice of dimensions to include was limited by the availability of data. More studies on women’s empowerment in the Southern African region of the SSA are further recommended to be carried out. In addition, context-specific studies with a specific focus on Southern Africa are required to add to the few existing literatures of women’s empowerment measure using primary data.

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-1-whe-10.1177_17455057251401817 – Supplemental material for Women’s empowerment measurements in sub-Saharan Africa: A systematic literature review

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-whe-10.1177_17455057251401817 for Women’s empowerment measurements in sub-Saharan Africa: A systematic literature review by Immanuel Shipanga, Opeoluwa Oyedele and Lawrence Kazembe in Women's Health

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

ORCID iD

Immanuel Shipanga

Ethical Considerations

This study is not applicable for ethical approval because all analyses were conducted using previously published studies.

Consent to participate

All analyses were conducted using previously published studies, thus informed consent from respondents or patients were not required.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Author contributions

Immanuel Shipanga: Conceptualization; Writing – original draft; Methodology; Project administration; Writing – review & editing.

Opeoluwa Oyedele: Conceptualization; Methodology; Supervision; Writing – review & editing.

Lawrence Kazembe: Methodology; Writing – review & editing.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data availability statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in . Further enquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Supplemental material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

References

Kabeer

. Gender equality and women’s empowerment:aA critical analysis of the third Millennium Development Goal. Gend Dev 2005; 13(1): 13–24.

Kabeer

. Resources, agency, achievements: reflections on the measurement of women’s empowerment. Dev Change 1999; 30: 435–64.

UNFPA. State of the world population 2005: the promise of equality gender equity, reproductive health and the millennium development goals. UNFPA, 2005.

Atake

Gnakou Ali

. Women’s empowerment and fertility preferences in high fertility countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. BMC Womens Health 2019; 19(1): 54.

Haque

Alam

Rahman

, et al. Women’s empowerment and fertility decision-making in 53 low and middle resource countries: A pooled analysis of demographic and health surveys. BMJ Open 2021; 11(6): e045952.

Singh

Speizer

Ijdi

, et al. The association of empowerment measures with maternal, child and family planning outcomes in Plateau State Nigeria by urban-rural residence. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2021; 21(1): 170.

Jones

Haardörfer

Ramakrishnan

, et al. Women’s empowerment and child nutrition: the role of intrinsic agency. SSM Popul Health 2019; 9: 100475.

Yaya

Odusina

Uthman

, et al. What does women’s empowerment have to do with malnutrition in Sub-Saharan Africa? Evidence from demographic and health surveys from 30 countries. Glob Health Res Policy 2020; 5: 1.

Upadhyay

Karasek

. Women’s empowerment and ideal family size: An examination of DHS empowerment measures in Sub-Saharan Africa. Int Perspect Sex Reprod Health 2012; 2(38): 78–89.

10.

Blackstone

. Women’s empowerment, household status and contraception use in Ghana. J Biosoc Sci 2017; 49: 423–434.

11.

Kareem

Morhason-Bello

OlaOlorun

, et al. Temporal relationship between Women’s empowerment and utilization of antenatal care services: lessons from four National Surveys in Sub-Saharan Africa. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2021; 21(1): 198.

12.

Aboagye

Okyere

Seidu

, et al. Does women’s empowerment and socio-economic status predict adequacy of antenatal care in sub-Saharan Africa? Int Health 2024; 16(2): 165–173.

13.

Abebe

Demissie

Adugna

. The association of women’s empowerment dimensions and antenatal care utilization in Ethiopia; facility based cross-sectional study. BMC Womens Health 2025; 25(1): 201.

14.

Ameyaw

Dickson

Adde

, et al. Do women empowerment indicators predict receipt of quality antenatal care in Cameroon? Evidence from a nationwide survey. BMC Womens Health 2021; 21(1): 343.

15.

Acker

. Feminist theory and the study of gender and education. Int Rev Educ 1987; 33: 419–435.

16.

Heyzer

. Making the links: women’s rights and empowerment are key to achieving the Millennium Development Goals. Gend Dev 2005; 13(1): 9–12.

17.

Ewerling

Lynch

Victora

, et al. The SWPER index for women’s empowerment in Africa: development and validation of an index based on survey data. Lancet Glob Health 2017; 5(9): 916–923.

18.

Asaolu

Alaofè

Gunn

JKL

, et al. Measuring women’s empowerment in Sub-Saharan Africa: exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses of the demographic and health surveys. Front Public Health 2018; 4: 994.

19.

Kishor

Gupta

. Women’s Empowerment in India and its states: evidence from the NFHS. Econ Polit Wkly 2004; 39: 694–712.

20.

Ibrahim

Kumar

Asabe Ibrahim

, et al. The influences of women’s empowerment on reproductive health outcomes: a comparative study of Nigeria and Uttar Pradesh state (India). J Med Sci Clin Res 2012; 3(3): 4745–4760.

21.

Ewerling

Lynch

Mittinty

, et al. The impact of women’s empowerment on their children’s early development in 26 African countries. J Glob Health 2020; 10(2): 020406.

22.

Tagang

Rwenge

JRM

. Women’s autonomy and fertility in Chad. Afr J Reprod Health 2023; 27(11): 63–82.

23.

Lan

Tavrow

. Composite measures of women’s empowerment and their association with maternal mortality in low-income countries. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2017; 17(Suppl 2): 337.

24.

Soharwardi

Ahmad

. Dimensions and determinants of women empowerment in developing countries. Int J Sustain Dev Plann 2020; 15(6): 957–964.

25.

Salcedo

Ruiz-Bravo

Barrantes

, et al. Measuring multidimensional women’s empowerment with data from partnered women across 45 low- and middle-income countries. Soc Indic Res 2024; 176: 1093–1119.

26.

Ahmed

MZEMNU

Nishan

MNH

Dahlqvist

, et al. Do empowerments influence experiencing intimate partner violence (IPV)? A multi-continental study of women across low and lower-middle-income countries. BMC Public Health 2025; 25(1): 891.

27.

Kwagala

Wandera

Ndugga

, et al. Empowerment, partner’s behaviours and intimate partner physical violence among married women in Uganda. BMC Public Health 2013; 13: 1112.

28.

Mengo

Okumu

Ombayo

, et al. Marital rape and HIV risk in Uganda: the impact of women’s empowerment factors. Violence Against Women 2019; 25(15): 1783–1805.

29.

Sserwanja

Nabbuye

Kawuki

. Dimensions of women empowerment on access to antenatal care in Uganda: a further analysis of the Uganda demographic health survey 2016. Int J Health Plann Manage 2022; 37(3): 1736–1753.

30.

Corroon

Speizer

Fotso

, et al. The role of gender empowerment on reproductive health outcomes in urban Nigeria. Matern Child Health J 2014; 18: 307–315.

31.

Solanke

. Marriage age, fertility behaviour, and women’s empowerment in Nigeria. Sage Open 2015; 5(4): 2158244015617989.

32.

Asaolu

Okafor

Ehiri

, et al. Association between measures of women’s empowerment and use of modern contraceptives: an analysis of Nigeria’s demographic and health surveys. Front Public Health 2017; 4: 293.

33.

Lewis

Ndiaye

Manzi

, et al. Associations between women’s empowerment, care seeking, and quality of malaria care for children: A cross-sectional analysis of demographic and health surveys in 16 sub-Saharan African countries. J Glob Health 2022; 12: 04025.

34.

Ntoimo

LFC

Okonofua

Aikpitanyi

, et al. Influence of women’s empowerment indices on the utilization of skilled maternity care: evidence from rural Nigeria. J Biosoc Sci 2022; 54(1): 77–93.

35.

Zhou

Ahuru

Yan

, et al. Influences of women empowerment indices on demand for childcare services: Evidence from the Nigeria Demographic and Health Surveys. Afr J Reprod Health 2023; 27(10): 65–80.

36.

Tiruneh

Chuang

. Women’s autonomy and maternal healthcare service utilization in Ethiopia. BMC Health Serv Res 2017; 17: 718.

37.

Bayissa

Smits

Ruben

. The multidimensional nature of women’s empowerment: beyond the economic approach. J Int Dev 2018; 30(4): 661–690.

38.

Ebrahim

Atteraya

. Women’s household decision-making and intimate partner violence in Ethiopia. Acad J Interdiscip Stud 2019; 8(2): 285–292.

39.

Tewabe

Tegegne Gesese

Mihrete

. Women’s empowerment, socioeconomic status and demo-graphic factors of contraception in Amhara National Regional State, Ethiopia: a sequential analysis. Ethiop Renaiss J Soc Sci Humanit 2020; 7(1): 18–36.

40.

Abreha

Walelign

Zereyesus

. Associations between women’s empowerment and children’s health status in Ethiopia. PLoS One 2020; 15(7): e0235825.

41.

Mekonnen

Odo

Nigatu

, et al. Women’s empowerment and child growth faltering in Ethiopia: evidence from the Demographic and Health Survey. BMC Womens Health 2021; 21(1): 42.

42.

Muluneh

Francis

Ayele

, et al. The effect of women’s empowerment in the utilisation of family planning in western Ethiopia: a structural equation modelling approach. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2021; 18(12): 6550.

43.

Baye

Laillou

Chitekwe

. Empowering women can improve child dietary diversity in Ethiopia. Matern Child Nutr 2021; 20(5): e13285.

44.

Wassie

Tenagashaw

Tiruye

. Women empowerment and childhood stunting: evidence from rural northwest Ethiopia. BMC Paediatr 2024; 24(1): 30.

45.

Shibre

Mekonnen

Mariam

. Level of and trends in women’s empowerment inequalities in antenatal care services in Ethiopia: further analysis of the Ethiopia demographic and health surveys, 2000-16. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2025; 25(1): 102.

46.

Alaofè

Zhu

Burney

, et al. Association between women’s empowerment and maternal and child nutrition in Kalalé District of Northern Benin. Food Nutr Bull 2017; 38(3): 302–318.

47.

Ford

Chibwesha

Winston

, et al. Women’s decision-making and uptake of services to prevent mother-to-child HIV transmission in Zambia. AIDS Care 2018; 30(4): 426–434.

48.

Voronca

Walker

Egede

. Relationship between empowerment and wealth: trends and predictors in Kenya between 2003 and 2008–2009. Int J Public Health 2018; 63(5): 641–649.

49.

Anderson

Chebet

Asaolu

, et al. Influence of women’s empowerment on place of delivery in North Eastern and Western Kenya: a cross-sectional analysis of the Kenya demographic health survey. J Epidemiol Glob Health 2020; 10(1): 65–73.

50.

Porth

Wagner

Moyer

, et al. Women’s empowerment and child vaccination in Kenya: the modifying role of wealth. Am J Prev Med 2021; 60(1): S87–S97.

51.

Odwe

Matanda

Zulu

, et al. Women’s empowerment and uptake of sulfadoxine–pyrimethamine for intermittent preventive treatment of malaria during pregnancy: results from a cross-sectional baseline survey in the Lake endemic region, Kenya. Malar J 2023; 22(1): 241.

52.

McKenna

Bartels

Pablo

, et al. Women’s decision-making power and undernutrition in their children under age five in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: a cross-sectional study. PLoS One 2019; 14(12): e0226041.

53.

Makongote

Mbunga

Akilimali

, et al. Women’s empowerment and associated factors in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo: a secondary data analysis of the performance monitoring assessment survey. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2024; 21(7): 943.

54.

Heckert

Olney

Ruel

. Is women’s empowerment a pathway to improving child nutrition outcomes in a nutrition-sensitive agriculture program? Evidence from a randomized controlled trial in Burkina Faso. Soc Sci Med 2019; 233: 93–102.

55.

Some

SYM

Huang

. Empowerment and use of modern contraceptive methods among married women in Burkina Faso: a multilevel analysis. BMC Public Health 2021; 21(1): 1498.

56.

Kazembe

. Women empowerment in Namibia: Measurement, determinants and geographical disparities. World Dev Perspect 2020; 19: 100211.

57.

Bengesai

Derera

. The association between women empowerment and emotional violence in Zimbabwe: A cluster analysis approach. Sage Open 2021; 11(2): 21582440211021399.

58.

Nguyen-Phung

. Women’s empowerment in Zimbabwe: examining the role of educational reform. Soc Indic Res 2025; 177(2): 489–531.

59.

Sserwanja

Mukunya

Musaba

, et al. Women empowerment indices and utilization of health facilities during childbirth: evidence from the 2019 Sierra Leone demographic health survey. BMC Health Serv Res 2023; 23(1): 109.

60.

Dickson

. Women empowerment and skilled birth attendants among women in rural Ghana. Biomed Res Int 2021; 2021: 9914027.

61.

Adokiya

Boah

Adampah

. Women’s autonomy and modern contraceptive use in Ghana: a secondary analysis of data from the 2014 Ghana Demographic and Health Survey. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2021; 26(5): 383–389.

62.

Dadzie

Amo-Adjei

Esia-Donkoh

. Women empowerment and minimum daily meal frequency among infants and young children in Ghana: analysis of Ghana demographic and health survey. BMC Public Health 2021; 21(1): 1700.

63.

Arthur-Holmes

Ahinkorah

Agbemavi

, et al. Safer sex negotiation among ghanaian women in sexual unions: does women’s household decision-making capacity matter? Arch Sex Behav 2023; 52(4): 1379–1387.

64.

Dadzie

Yengnone

Frimpong

, et al. Association between women’s empowerment and fertility preferences in Ghana. Int Health 2024; 16: 512–522.

65.

Achana

Tanle

Doku

. Women’s autonomy, neonatal, infant and under-five mortality in the Upper East Region of Ghana. PLOS Glob Public Health 2024; 4(9): e0002776.

66.

Castro Lopes

Constant

Fraga

, et al. Socio-economic, demographic, and behavioural determinants of women’s empowerment in Mozambique. PLoS One 2021; 16(5): e0252294.

67.

Castro Lopes

Constant

Fraga

, et al. How women’s empowerment influences fertility-related outcomes and contraceptive practices: a cross-sectional study in Mozambique. PLOS Glob Public Health 2022; 2(9): e000670.

68.

Mokam

Zamo Akono

. The association between women’s empowerment and reproductive health care utilization in Cameroon. Int J Qual Health Care 2022; 34(2): mzac032.

69.

Mganga

Renju

Todd

, et al. Development of a women’s empowerment index for Tanzania from the demographic and health surveys of 2004–05, 2010, and 2015–16. Emerg Themes Epidemiol 2021; 18(13): 13.

70.

Bamusi

Philip

Bhat

. Women’s empowerment and its influence on the uptake of breast cancer screening in Tanzania: an analysis of 2022 Tanzania demographic health survey data. BMC Womens Health 2024; 24(1): 495.

71.

Kawuki

Gatasi

Sserwanja

. Women empowerment and health insurance utilisation in Rwanda: a nationwide cross-sectional survey. BMC Women’s Health 2022; 22(1): 378.

72.

Nibogore

Eryurt

. Women’s empowerment and infant mortality: evidence from Rwanda. Matern Child Health J 2024; 28(6): 1092–1102.

73.

Sey-Sawo

Sarr

Bah

, et al. Women’s empowerment and nutritional status of children in the Gambia: further analysis of the 2020 Gambia demographic and health survey. BMC Public Health 2023; 23(1): 583.

74.

Hindin

Muntifering

. Women’s autonomy and timing of most recent sexual intercourse in sub-Saharan Africa: a multi-country analysis. J Sex Res 2011; 48(6): 511–519.

75.

Kurimoto

. Women’s empowerment and choice of contraceptive methods in selected African countries. Int Perspect Sex Reprod Health 2012; 1(38): 23–33.

76.

Jennings

Cherewick

, et al. Women’s empowerment and male involvement in antenatal care: analyses of Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) in selected African countries. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2014; 14(1): 297.

77.

Jennings

Talegawkar

, et al. Association between women’s empowerment and infant and child feeding practices in sub-Saharan Africa: an analysis of Demographic and Health Surveys. Public Health Nutr 2015; 18(17): 3155–3565.

78.

Shimamoto

Gipson

. The relationship of women’s status and empowerment with skilled birth attendant use in Senegal and Tanzania. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2015; 15: 154.

79.

Yaya

Uthman

Ekholuenetale

, et al. Women empowerment as an enabling factor of contraceptive use in sub-Saharan Africa: a multilevel analysis of cross-sectional surveys of 32 countries. Reprod Health 2018; 15: 214.

80.

Miedema

Haardörfer

Girard

, et al. Women’s empowerment in East Africa: development of a cross-country comparable measure. World Dev 2018; 110: 453–464.

81.

Chol

Negin

Agho

, et al. Women’s autonomy and utilisation of maternal healthcare services in 31 Sub-Saharan African countries: results from the demographic and health surveys, 2010–2016. BMJ Open 2019; 9(3): e023128.

82.

Dickson

Adde

Ameyaw

. Women empowerment and skilled birth attendance in sub-Saharan Africa: a multicountry analysis. PLoS One 2021; 16(7): e0254281.

83.

Ameyaw

Njue

Amoah

, et al. Is improvement in indicators of women’s empowerment associated with uptake of WHO recommended IPTp-SP levels in sub-Saharan Africa? A multilevel approach. BMJ Open 2021; 11(10): e047606.

84.

Bliznashka

Udo

Sudfeld

, et al. Associations between women’s empowerment and child development, growth, and nurturing care practices in sub-Saharan Africa: a cross-sectional analysis of demographic and health survey data. PLoS Med 2021; 18(9): e1003781.

85.

Adde

Ameyaw

Dickson

, et al. Women’s empowerment indicators and short- and long-acting contraceptive method use: evidence from DHS from 11 countries. Reprod Health 2022; 19(1): 222.

86.

Komakech

Walters

Rakotomanana

, et al. The associations between women’s empowerment measures, child growth and dietary diversity: findings from an analysis of demographic and health surveys of seven countries in Eastern Africa. Matern Child Nutr 2022; 18(4): e13421.

87.

Seidu

Ahinkorah

Ameyaw

, et al. Women empowerment indicators and uptake of child health services in sub-Saharan Africa: a multilevel analysis using cross-sectional data from 26 countries. J Public Health 2022; 44(4): 740–752.

88.

Zegeye

Idriss-Wheeler

Ahinkorah

, et al. Association between women’s household decision-making autonomy and health insurance enrollment in Sub-Saharan Africa. BMC Public Health 2023; 23(1): 610.

89.

Wilunda

Wanjohi

Takahashi

, et al. Association of women’s empowerment with anaemia and haemoglobin concentration in children in sub-Saharan Africa: a multilevel analysis. Matern Child Nutr 2023; 19(1): e13426.

90.

Anik

Towhid

MII

Haque

. Association of spousal violence and women’s empowerment status among the rural women of sub-Saharan Africa. J Biosoc Sci 2023; 55(1): 55–73.

91.

Schierl

Tanaka

Klug

, et al. The association of women’s empowerment with HIV-related indicators: a pooled analysis of demographic and health surveys in Sub-Saharan Africa. J Epidemiol Glob Health 2023; 13(4): 816–824.

92.

Christian

Atiglo

Okyere

, et al. Women’s empowerment, children’s nutritional status, and the mediating role of household headship structure: evidence from sub-Saharan Africa. Matern Child Nutr 2023; 19(3): e13520.

93.

Habte

Tamene

Bogale

. Women empowerment domains and unmet need for contraception among married and cohabiting fecund women in Sub-Saharan Africa: a multilevel analysis based on gender role framework. PLoS One 2023; 18 (9): e0291110.

94.

Amoah

Issaka

Ayebeng

, et al. Influence of women empowerment on childhood (12–23 months) immunization coverage: Recent evidence from 17 sub-Saharan African countries. Trop Med Health 2023; 51(1): 63.

95.

Cardona

Williams

Gummerson

, et al. Measuring women’s economic empowerment in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Kenya, Nigeria, and Burkina Faso. Fem Econ 2024; 30(2): 162–190.

96.

Donkoh

Aboagye

Okyere

, et al. Association between the survey-based women’s empowerment index (SWPER) and intimate partner violence in sub-Saharan Africa. Reprod Health 2024; 21(1): 63.

97.

Aboagye

Donkoh

Okyere

, et al. Can women empowerment boost dietary diversity among children aged 6–23 months in sub-Saharan Africa? Trop Med Health 2024; 52(1): 39.

98.

Salihu

Dadzie

Gebremedhin

, et al. Spatial Heterogeneity and association between the survey-based Women’s Empowerment Index (SWPER) and unmet need for birth spacing in sub-Saharan Africa. Contracept Reprod Med 2024; 9(1): 52.

99.

Eom

Chi

Jung

, et al. Women’s empowerment and child anthropometric failures across 28 sub-Saharan African countries: a cross-level interaction by gender inequality index. SSM Popul Health 2024; 26: 101651.

100.

Hellwig

Wado

Barros

AJD

. Association between women’s empowerment and demand for family planning satisfied among Christians and Muslims in multireligious African countries. BMJ Glob Health 2024; 9: e013651.

101.

Eom

Chi

Bhatia

, et al. Individual- and community-level women’s empowerment and complete use of maternal healthcare services: a multilevel analysis of 34 sub-Saharan African countries. Soc Sci Med 2025; 370: 117816.

102.

Ayebeng

Okyere

Arthur

, et al. Cohabitation in sub-Saharan Africa: Does women empowerment matter? Insights from the demographic and health survey. PLoS One 2025; 20(5): e0322222.

103.

Aboagye

Essuman

Salihu

, et al. Association between the Survey-based Women’s Empowerment (SWPER) index and barriers to healthcare in sub-Saharan Africa. Int Health 2025; 17(5): 734–744.

104.

Zegeye

Ahinkorah

Ameyaw

, et al. Women’s decision-making power and knowledge of prevention of mother to child transmission of HIV in sub-Saharan Africa. BMC Womens Health 2022; 22(1): 115.

105.

Ameyaw

Anjorin

Ahinkorah

, et al. Women’s empowerment and female genital mutilation intention for daughters in Sierra Leone: a multilevel analysis. BMC Womens Health 2021; 21(1): 200.

106.

Leasure

Roth

Yegon

, et al. Women’s empowerment and attitudes towards female genital mutilation abandonment in Nigeria: a cross-sectional analysis of the Nigeria demographic health survey. Afr J Reprod Health 2022; 26(12): 127–137.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.09 MB