MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2130485746 · doi:10.5430/jnep.v6n1p85

Association between quality of family planning services and client's satisfaction level in maternal and child health centers in Port Said city

2015· article· en· W2130485746 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Elsayda Hamdy Nasr, Hanan Elzeblawy Hassan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Education and Practice · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Quality and Satisfaction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPort (circuit theory)Association (psychology)Quality (philosophy)PsychologyBusinessNursingEnvironmental healthMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background : Improving quality of care has been a necessary goal for family planning programmes worldwide. Services should be convenient, accessible and acceptable to clients. In addition, it is essential to provide follow-up care to ensure continuity of services and an adequate logistics system to ensure continuity of supplies. Patient satisfaction is reportedly a useful measure to provide a direct indicator of quality in health care. Thus, it is needed to be measured frequently Aim: To assess the association between quality of family planning services and client's satisfaction level in maternal & child health centers in Port Said city. Subject and Methods : A cross sectional descriptive research design included two main convenient samples were recruited in the study through 5 months, the family planning nurses (20) and clients attending these centers (240). The study was carried out at ten family planning clinics in ten centers representing the five districts of Port Said. Results : Statistically significant difference correlation was found between quality of family planning counseling of nurses practice and their number of received training program, the mean percentage of the client ’ s (95.4%) were satisfied with family planning services. Conclusions : The number of received training program affects quality of family planning counseling of nurse ’ s practice, providers of the services and the provided services affect the client satisfaction.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.433
GPT teacher head0.585
Teacher spread0.151 · 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

Citations24
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nursing Education and PracticeSame topicHealthcare Quality and SatisfactionFrench-language works237,207