MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1563718244 · doi:10.1016/s2214-109x(15)00059-5

Tanzania's Countdown to 2015: an analysis of two decades of progress and gaps for reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health, to inform priorities for post-2015

2015· article· en· W1563718244 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Global Health · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGovernment of CanadaWorld Health OrganizationBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsCountdownTanzaniaReproductive healthMaternal healthEnvironmental healthDeveloping countryMedicineEconomic growthGeographyPolitical sciencePopulationHealth servicesEnvironmental planning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Tanzania is on track to meet Millennium Development Goal (MDG) 4 for child survival, but is making insufficient progress for newborn survival and maternal health (MDG 5) and family planning. To understand this mixed progress and to identify priorities for the post-2015 era, Tanzania was selected as a Countdown to 2015 case study. METHODS: We analysed progress made in Tanzania between 1990 and 2014 in maternal, newborn, and child mortality, and unmet need for family planning, in which we used a health systems evaluation framework to assess coverage and equity of interventions along the continuum of care, health systems, policies and investments, while also considering contextual change (eg, economic and educational). We had five objectives, which assessed each level of the health systems evaluation framework. We used the Lives Saved Tool (LiST) and did multiple linear regression analyses to explain the reduction in child mortality in Tanzania. We analysed the reasons for the slower changes in maternal and newborn survival and family planning, to inform priorities to end preventable maternal, newborn, and child deaths by 2030. FINDINGS: In the past two decades, Tanzania's population has doubled in size, necessitating a doubling of health and social services to maintain coverage. Total health-care financing also doubled, with donor funding for child health and HIV/AIDS more than tripling. Trends along the continuum of care varied, with preventive child health services reaching high coverage (≥85%) and equity (socioeconomic status difference 13-14%), but lower coverage and wider inequities for child curative services (71% coverage, socioeconomic status difference 36%), facility delivery (52% coverage, socioeconomic status difference 56%), and family planning (46% coverage, socioeconomic status difference 22%). The LiST analysis suggested that around 39% of child mortality reduction was linked to increases in coverage of interventions, especially of immunisation and insecticide-treated bednets. Economic growth was also associated with reductions in child mortality. Child health programmes focused on selected high-impact interventions at lower levels of the health system (eg, the community and dispensary levels). Despite its high priority, implementation of maternal health care has been intermittent. Newborn survival has gained attention only since 2005, but high-impact interventions are already being implemented. Family planning had consistent policies but only recent reinvestment in implementation. INTERPRETATION: Mixed progress in reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health in Tanzania indicates a complex interplay of political prioritisation, health financing, and consistent implementation. Post-2015 priorities for Tanzania should focus on the unmet need for family planning, especially in the Western and Lake regions; addressing gaps for coverage and quality of care at birth, especially in rural areas; and continuation of progress for child health. FUNDING: Government of Canada, Foreign Affairs, Trade, and Development; US Fund for UNICEF; and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.376 · 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