The role of a maternity waiting area (MWA) in reducing maternal mortality and stillbirths in high‐risk women in rural Ethiopia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe maternal mortality and stillbirth rates among women admitted via a maternity waiting area (MWA) and women admitted directly to the same hospital (non-MWA) over a 22-year period. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Hospital in rural Ethiopia, which provided comprehensive emergency obstetric care and has an established MWA. POPULATION: All women admitted for delivery between 1987 and 2008. METHODS: Data on maternal deaths, stillbirths, caesarean section and uterine rupture were abstracted from routine hospital records. Sociodemographic characteristics, antenatal care and other data were collected for 2008 only. Rates and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for maternal mortality and stillbirth. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Maternal mortality and stillbirth. RESULTS: There were 24, 148 deliveries over the study period, 6805 admitted via MWA and 17, 343 admitted directly. Maternal mortality was 89.9 per 100, 000 live births (95% CI, 41.1-195.2) for MWA women and 1333.1 per 100, 000 live births (95% CI, 1156.2-1536.7) for non-MWA women; stillbirth rates were 17.6 per 1000 births (95% CI, 14.8-21.0) and 191.2 per 1000 births (95% CI, 185.4-197.1), respectively; 38.5% of MWA women were delivered by caesarean section compared with 20.3% of non-MWA women, and none had uterine rupture, compared with 5.8% in the non-MWA group. For the 1714 women admitted in 2008, relatively small differences in sociodemographic characteristics, distance and antenatal care uptake were found between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Maternal mortality and stillbirth rates were substantially lower in women admitted via MWA. It is likely that at least part of this difference is accounted for by the timely and appropriate obstetric management of women using this facility.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".