The Costs of Separation: The Birth Experiences of Women in Isolated and Remote Communities in British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article est le risultat d'une enqukte qualitative des expkriences dhccoucbkes dans les communautks kloignkes de la Colombie-Britannique. Les rksultats donnent uneplus haut tauxde mortalitk causkepar lbbligation pour lesfemmes de quitter leur communautk pour accoucber. There has been a precipitous decline during the past few years in the number of rural communities across Canada offering local maternity care services (Hutton-Czapski 200 1, 2000; Rourke). There have been sev-eralcontributors to this trend includ-ing health service delivery restructur-ing, difficulties in physician reten-tion and recruitment in rural com-munities (Statement ofMaternity and Newborn Care in Canada), and the trend towards the "medicalization" of childbirth in industrialized coun-tries (Wiegers). Communities that have lost services now join other small rural and remote communities where, due to health human resource capac-ity, geographic isolation, and econo-mies of scale, local birth has not been part of the health services infrastruc-ture for several decades. Pregnant women in these small communities face significant challenges to access-ing care, which in many instances leads to stress and anxiety during the childbearing year (Kornelsen and Grzybowski 2004b; Chamberlain and Barclay). There is a growing understanding of the physiological consequences of stress during pregnancy, with research focusing primarily on the relation-ship between stress and preterm la-bour (Mackey and Boyle; Misra;
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".