Unmet needs, limited access: A qualitative study of postpartum health care experiences of people with disabilities
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
AIM: To understand the postpartum care received by birthing people with disabilities and their newborns, from their own perspectives. DESIGN: A qualitative study with semi-structured interviews. METHODS: Between July 2019 and February 2020, in-person and virtual interviews were conducted with 31 people with physical, sensory, and intellectual/developmental disabilities in Ontario, Canada, about the formal inpatient and outpatient services and supports they used in the first few months after they gave birth. Thematic analysis was used identify common themes. RESULTS: We identified three overall themes concerning participants' postpartum care experiences and the different types of formal services received in and out of hospital: (1) lack of adequate care, (2) lack of provider awareness of disability and disability accommodations, and (3) fear of judgement, discrimination, and intrusive surveillance. The identified themes were applicable across disability groups. However, most comments on disability accommodations came from participants with physical or sensory disabilities, while participants with intellectual/developmental disabilities most commonly reported concerns about lack of adequate care and fear of judgement, discrimination, and intrusive surveillance. CONCLUSION: Findings indicate that postpartum care often fails people with disabilities. This could contribute to negative health consequences for them and their newborns. IMPACT: Birthing people with disabilities need multidisciplinary, proactive, and strengths-based postpartum care to mitigate risk for health complications. Further, disability-related training and guidelines for health and social service providers is required. REPORTING METHOD: Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ). PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Our research team included two peer researchers with physical disabilities who served as co-interviewers and participated in data analysis, contributing their lived experience of disability and interactions with the health care system. All stages of the study were also informed by feedback from the study's Advisory Committee, which comprised women with disabilities (many of whom are parents), disability organization staff, clinicians, and policy representatives.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle