MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097774549 · doi:10.1186/s12939-014-0112-4

Using the unmet obstetric needs indicator to map inequities in life-saving obstetric interventions at the local health care system in Kenya

2014· article· en· W2097774549 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Elizabeth Echoka, Dominique Dubourg, Anselimo Makokha, Yeri Kombe, Øystein E. Olsen, Moses Mwangi, Bjørg Evjen‐Olsen, Jens Byskov

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Equity in Health · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAfrican Population and Health Research CenterEuropean CommissionInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsMedicineDeveloping countryCephalopelvic disproportionPsychological interventionChildbirthHealth facilityCaesarean sectionHealth services researchPublic healthPopulationPregnancyEnvironmental healthNursingHealth servicesEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Developing countries with high maternal mortality need to invest in indicators that not only provide information about how many women are dying, but also where, and what can be done to prevent these deaths. The unmet Obstetric Needs (UONs) concept provides this information. This concept was applied at district level in Kenya to assess how many women had UONs and where the women with unmet needs were located. METHODS: A facility based retrospective study was conducted in 2010 in Malindi District, Kenya. Data on pregnant women who underwent a major obstetric intervention (MOI) or died in facilities that provide comprehensive Emergency Obstetric Care (EmOC) services in 2008 and 2009 were collected. The difference between the number of women who experienced life threatening obstetric complications and those who received care was quantified. The main outcome measures in the study were the magnitude of UONs and their geographical distribution. RESULTS: 566 women in 2008 and 724 in 2009 underwent MOI. Of these, 185 (32.7%) in 2008 and 204 (28.1%) in 2009 were for Absolute Maternal Indications (AMI). The most common MOI was caesarean section (90%), commonly indicated by Cephalopelvic Disproportion (CPD)-narrow pelvis (27.6% in 2008; 26.1% in 2009). Based on a reference rate of 1.4%, the overall MOI for AMI rate was 1.25% in 2008 and 1.3% in 2009. In absolute terms, 22 (11%) women in 2008 and 12 (6%) in 2009, who required a life saving intervention failed to get it. Deficits in terms of unmet needs were identified in rural areas only while urban areas had rates higher than the reference rate (0.8% vs. 2.2% in 2008; 0.8% vs. 2.1% in 2009). CONCLUSIONS: The findings, if used as a proxy to maternal mortality, suggest that rural women face higher risks of dying during pregnancy and childbirth. This indicates the need to improve priority setting towards ensuring equity in access to life saving interventions for pregnant women in underserved areas.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.168
Threshold uncertainty score0.333

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations12
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Equity in HealthSame topicGlobal Maternal and Child HealthFrench-language works237,207