A community‐based long‐term follow up of women undergoing obstetric fistula repair in rural Ethiopia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess urinary and reproductive health and quality of life following surgical repair of obstetric fistula. DESIGN: Follow-up study. SETTING: A newly established fistula clinic (2004) at Gimbie Adventist Hospital, a 71-bedded district general hospital in West Wollega Zone, in rural Western Ethiopia. POPULATION: Thirty-eight women (86%) of 44 who had undergone fistula repair were identified in their community. METHODS: Community-based structured interviews 14-28 months following fistula repair, using a customised questionnaire addressing urinary health, reproductive health and quality of life. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Urinary health at follow up was assessed as completely dry, stress or urge incontinence, or fistula. King's Health Questionnaire was modified and used for the quality-of-life assessment. RESULTS: At follow up, 21 women (57%) were completely dry, 13 (35%) suffered from stress or urge incontinence and three (8%) had a persistent fistula. Surgery improved quality of life and facilitated social reintegration to a level comparable to that experienced before fistula development for both women who were dry and those with residual incontinence (P = 0.001). For women still suffering from fistula no change was seen (P = 0.1). Four women became pregnant following their surgery, among which there was one maternal death, three stillbirths and one re-occurrence of fistula. CONCLUSION: Community-based, long-term follow up after fistula repair succeeded in Western rural Ethiopia. Despite one-third still suffering stress or urge incontinence, the women reported improved quality of life and social reintegration after fistula closure.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".