MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140220450 · doi:10.1093/pubmed/fdp038

Does child gender determine household decision for health care in rural Thatta, Pakistan?

2009· article· en· W2140220450 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Rozina Nuruddin, Wilbur C. Hadden, M. R. Petersen, Meng Kin Lim

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Public Health · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsMedicineChild mortalityPovertyHealth careDemographySocioeconomic statusPublic healthGirlEnvironmental healthPediatricsPopulationPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In South Asia, gender disparity in child mortality is highest in Pakistan. We examined the influence of child gender on household decision regarding health care. METHODS: Prevalence ratios were calculated for 3740 children aged 1-59 months from 92 randomly selected villages of rural Pakistan using a cluster-adjusted log-binomial model. Level 1 variables included child and household characteristics and level 2 included village characteristics. RESULTS: There were 25 more girl deaths than boys per 1000 live births (95% CI: 13.9, 48.6) among post-neonates and 38 more among children aged 12-59 months (95% CI: 10.5, 65.5). However, in adjusted analysis, gender was not a significant predictor of illness reporting, visit to health facilities, choice of provider, hospitalization and health expenditure. Significant predictors of health care were child's age, illness characteristics, number of children in the family, household socio-economic status and absence of girls' school in the village. CONCLUSIONS: Differential care seeking for boys and girls is not seen in Thatta despite clear differences in mortality ratios. This calls for more creative research to identify pathways for gender differential in child mortality. Factors identified as influencing child health care and amenable to modification include poverty alleviation and girls' education.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.832
Threshold uncertainty score0.493

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 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

Citations33
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Public HealthSame topicGlobal Maternal and Child HealthFrench-language works237,207