MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W111798539 · doi:10.22605/rrh943

Obstetric services in small rural communities: what are the risks to care providers?

2008· article· en· W111798539 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jude Kornelsen, Stefan Grzybowski

Bibliographic record

VenueRural and Remote Health · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsVancouver Coastal Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursingMaternity careMedicineService providerFocus groupRural areaQualitative researchService (business)BusinessFamily medicineHealth careEconomic growthSociologyMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: In spite of a sharp decline, since 2000, in the number of rural communities in Canada that offer local maternity care, there remain significant numbers of small rural maternity services that provide elective maternity care without on-site access to cesarean section. In communities with an elective maternity service without local access to surgical capability, practitioners must be prepared to respond to obstetrical emergencies and arrange urgent transfer if a cesarean section is indicated. In most cases reasonably safe care can be provided by this model, but the possibility of an unexpected emergency that threatens the fetus or mother always exists. Although there is an emerging understanding of the stressors faced by rural physicians, little is known about the experience of care providers offering maternity care in low-resourced environments. This article considers the experience of rural maternity care providers from the perspective of the social risks they perceive are incurred by practicing in a low-resource environment. METHODS: A qualitative exploratory approach was employed, using in-depth interviews and focus groups with care providers in three rural communities in British Columbia, Canada. The transcripts were thematically analyzed in four stages. RESULTS: Twenty-six care providers were interviewed across the three communities, including 15 nurses and 11 physicians. Participants identified elements of personal risk they perceived were assumed by offering intra-partum care in communities without local access to cesarean section back up, and the potential effects of these risks on themselves and their communities. They further recognized the unique attributes of maternity care, which, when juxtaposed with other aspects of primary care, led to a heightened sense of social risk in a rural environment. CONCLUSION: A balanced approach to risk management grounded in a comprehensive understanding of the values that influence decision-making, including acknowledgement of the social risks care providers incur, is a necessary step towards better health services for rural parturient women and their babies. Additional strategies may include community-based identification of the risks and benefits of local care, and programs of professional support for rural obstetrical care providers experiencing stress.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.158
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRural and Remote HealthSame topicMaternal and Perinatal Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207