The Reality of Resistance: The Experiences of Rural Parturient Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The closure of many local maternity services has given rise to contemporary realities of care for many rural parturient women in Canada, which, in turn, determines their experience of birth. To date, we do not have an understanding of the realities influencing the birthing experiences of rural parturient women. This qualitative investigation explored these issues with women from four rural British Columbian communities through semistructured interviews and focus groups. Women in this study articulated four realities that influenced the nature of their experience of birth, including geographic realities, the availability of local health service resources, and the influence of parity and financial implications of leaving the community to give birth. When these realities were incongruent with participants' needs in birth, participants developed strategies of resistance to mitigate the dissonance. Strategies included trying to time the birth at the referral hospital by undergoing an elective induction and seasonal timing of pregnancies to minimize the risk of winter travel. Some women showed up at the local hospital in an advanced stage of labor to avoid transfer to a referral center, or in some instances, had an unassisted homebirth.
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 | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".