MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2007051838 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0014637

Capturing the Context of Maternal Deaths from Verbal Autopsies: A Reliability Study of the Maternal Data Extraction Tool (M-DET)

2011· article· en· W2007051838 on OpenAlexafffund
Ann L. Montgomery, Shaun K. Morris, Rajesh Kumar, Raju Jotkar, Prem Mony, Diego G. Bassani, Prabhat Jha

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsCentre for Global Health ResearchUniversity of TorontoSickKids FoundationPublic Health OntarioHospital for Sick ChildrenSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersUniversity of TorontoSick Kids FoundationUNICEFMarch of Dimes Foundation
KeywordsMedicineReferralContext (archaeology)Maternal deathPregnancyData extractionHealth carePediatricsFamily medicineMEDLINEPopulationEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The availability of quality data to inform policy is essential to reduce maternal deaths. To characterize maternal deaths in settings without complete vital registration systems, we designed and assessed the inter-rater reliability of a tool to systematically extract data and characterize the events that precede a nationally representative sample of maternal deaths in India. METHOD/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Of 1017 nationally representative pregnancy-related deaths, which occurred between 2001 and 2003, we randomly selected 105 reports. Two independent coders used the maternal data extraction tool (questions with coding guidelines) to collect information on antenatal care access, final pregnancy outcome; planned place of birth and care provider; community consultation, transport, admission, hospital referral; and verification of cause of death assignment. Kappa estimated inter-rater agreement was calculated and classified as poor (K≤0.4), moderate (K = 0.4≤0.6), substantial (K = 0.6≤ 0.8) and high (K>0.8) using the criteria from Landis & Koch. The data extraction tool had high agreement for gestational age, pregnancy outcome, transport, death en route and admission to hospital; substantial agreement for receipt of antenatal care, planned place of birth, readmission and referral to higher level hospital, and whether or not death occurred in the intrapartum period; moderate to substantial agreement for classification of deaths as direct or indirect obstetric deaths or incidental deaths; moderate agreement for classification of community healthcare consultation and total number of healthcare contacts; and poor agreement for the classification of deaths as sudden deaths and other/unknown cause of death. The ability of the tool to identify the most-responsible-person in labour varied from moderate agreement to high agreement. CONCLUSIONS: This data extraction tool achieved good inter-rater reliability and can be used to collect data on events surrounding maternal deaths and for verification/improvement of underlying cause of death.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.205
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.384
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.795
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2050.384
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
DomainMethods
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicGlobal Maternal and Child Health→French-language works237,207→