Primiparous women's experiences of labour in Harare, Zimbabwe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A study of primiparous women in Harare, Zimbabwe was undertaken to assess women's knowledge about the process of labour and to ascertain whether communication with health professionals increased women's knowledge and whether they understood thr risks of certain bahaviours in labour. A retrospective qualitative study was undertaken among primiparous women in Harare, Zimbabwe from which a purposive sample was selected. Qualitative interviews were used to collect data from a purposive sample of primiparous women in their homes, one week after delivery of their first babies. Data saturation was achieved after interviewing and collecting data from ten women. Modified grounded analysis was used in the analysis of the qualitative data. The results revealed that primiparous women who delivered in maternity units in Harare did not receive information about labour from health professionals before labour. There were areas of conflict during the labour process between the women's cultural teaching and health professionals' knowledge of labour. The women were most distressed by the pain of labour and the process of acquiring pain relief, as well as poor communication with health professionals in general. The results suggest a need for continuing education for midwives in management of labour and improved communication between health professionals and women before and during labour.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".