Models of antenatal care and obstetric outcomes in Sydney South West
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess obstetric outcomes of different models of antenatal care. METHODS: The study was historical cohort analysis of population birth data of 67,675 singleton births delivered in all public hospitals in Sydney South-west. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were compared for different models of antenatal care received. The care was provided within the hospitals in doctor's clinic, midwives' clinic, birth centre, or by a team of midwives in the caseload midwifery. In the non-hospital settings, the care was provided by private obstetricians or by the general practitioner (GP) as part of the GP Shared Care program. The data for those women who received no antenatal care were also analysed. RESULTS: This study provided information that the obstetric outcomes were very similar regardless of whether a woman received her antenatal care in the midwives' clinic, the birth centre, under the GP Shared Care program or in the doctor's clinic in Sydney South-west hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence for the view that different models of maternity care can be provided with good outcomes.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it