The impact of an educational pamphlet on knowledge and anxiety in women with preeclampsia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to evaluate whether or not an educational pamphlet could improve knowledge without increasing anxiety in women with preeclampsia. METHODS: One hundred women recruited from an inpatient setting with suspected or proven preeclampsia were asked to answer a questionnaire assessing demographics, knowledge (primary outcome), anxiety and satisfaction (secondary outcomes) after being randomized to an intervention group (who received a pamphlet) or a control group (who did not received a pamphlet). The pamphlet and questionnaire, both designed by a multidisciplinary team, were read and answered at the same time. RESULTS: Baseline and demographic characteristics were similar between the two groups. Knowledge about the symptoms of pre-eclampsia was excellent in both groups (61% to 100% correct answers). Women in both groups were well aware that preeclampsia in the past (P = 0.22) and a family history of preeclampsia (P = 0.57) were risk factors. There was a significant difference in knowledge about the risk of some fetal complications, including death (90% versus 39%, P < 0.01) and all maternal complications (P < 0.05) favouring the intervention group. Despite increased knowledge about preeclampsia and its risks, anxiety was not greater in the intervention group. Overall, there was a trend towards less knowledge in vulnerable subgroups (non-white, low income and schooling levels), but the improvement of knowledge with the pamphlet was equivalent. Baseline anxiety was higher in the vulnerable groups, but was generally not increased by the pamphlet. CONCLUSION: An educational pamphlet for women with suspected preeclampsia was able to increase knowledge without increasing anxiety.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it