MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129962036 · doi:10.1093/heapol/czn032

Modelling prenatal health care utilization in Tajikistan using a two-stage approach: implications for policy and research

2008· article· en· W2129962036 on OpenAlexaff
Nazim Habibov, Lida Fan

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Policy and Planning · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsLakehead UniversityUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrenatal careHealth carePublic healthPovertyContext (archaeology)Logistic regressionHealth policyEnvironmental healthEducational attainmentMedicineBusinessDemographic economicsEconomic growthPopulationEconomicsNursingGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the transition from a centrally planned to a market economy, Tajikistan has witnessed a high rate of child and maternal mortality, a decline in the birth rate and a significant drop in public expenditures on health care. Against this backdrop, this paper analyses the determinants of prenatal health care utilization using Andersen's behavioural model, which has been modified to the context of Tajikistan. We applied a two-stage sequential model to data drawn from a nationally representative survey. Binary logit regression is used to predict and explain the probability of using prenatal health care services, while negative binomial regression is used to predict and explain the frequency of using these services. Findings suggest that higher educational attainment increases the utilization of prenatal care. Conversely, poverty, limited knowledge about matters related to sex, low quality of health care service, lack of public infrastructure, as well as absence of or long distance of travel to the nearest health facility, all reduce the utilization of prenatal health care. Health policy and research implications are presented and 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.562
Threshold uncertainty score0.964

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.367
GPT teacher head0.525
Teacher spread0.158 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations49
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Policy and PlanningSame topicGlobal Maternal and Child HealthFrench-language works237,207