MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063273612 · doi:10.4236/health.2014.619300

Experiences of Low Gestational Weight Gain: A Phenomenological Study with Pregnant Women

2014· article· en· W2063273612 on OpenAlexaffabout
Cynthia Murray, Sherrill Conroy

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicObesity and Health Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeight gainQualitative researchBreastfeedingLow birth weightMedicineDevelopmental psychologyObstetricsPsychologyPregnancyPediatricsSociologyBody weight

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Low maternal, gestational weight gain is associated with preterm birth, intrauterine growth restriction, low birthweight, small-for-gestational-age infants, neural tube defects, infant death, failure to initiate breastfeeding, and childhood asthma. The advantage of qualitative research is it can provide valuable insights for health care professionals into the experience and perceptions of low gestational weight gain from the vantage point of women with first-hand lived experience. In this Heideggarian interpretive phenomenological study, the meaning and experiences of weight gain for pregnant women with low gestational weight gain were explored. Data were collected through interviews with 10 pregnant women from Atlantic Canada. Conroy’s pathway for interpretive phenomenology was utilized. A hermeneutical spiral of interpretation identified six patterns or major themes: confronting one’s mortality; defending oneself against a permanent metamorphosis into a stranger; playing with fire and brimstone; slipping under the radar; trying to find peace; and riding an emotional roller coaster. The findings point to a war that is being waged over pregnant bodies with respect to weight that leaves pregnant women fending for themselves, apparently with little help from their health care providers. Implications of the findings for health practice, education, and research are discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.363 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthSame topicObesity and Health PracticesFrench-language works237,207