Factors Associated with Child Health Card Holding among Mothers of Western Rural Nepal: A Cross Sectional Community Based Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of Child Health Card (CHC) has been found effective to assess overall health status of children worldwide. The tool is simple, cost-effective and easy to use yet standard enough to interpret. Nepal recently made contextual modifications in 2006 and has incorporated it into the Health Management Information System. The card is issued to all children during their first visit for immunization. In Nepal, CHC is considered a valid and authentic report for immunization but little has been studied about its holding. The use of Child Health Card (CHC) has been found effective to assess overall health status of children worldwide. The tool is simple, cost-effective and easy to use yet standard enough to interpret. Nepal recently made contextual modifications in 2006 and has incorporated it into the Health Management Information System. The card is issued to all children during their first visit for immunization. In Nepal, CHC is considered a valid and authentic report for immunization but little has been studied about its holding. The objective of our study was to find its retention rate along with the factors associated. A community-based cross-sectional study was carried out in 10 village development committees of Kapilvastu district between November 15 and December 15, 2010. A total of 190 households were selected using lot quality assurance sampling technique. Higher retention rate (88.9%) of CHC was found while status of complete immunization was significantly associated with its retention [adjusted OR: 41.92, (95%CI; 2.66-658), p=0.008] after adjusting for growth monitoring, ethnicity, place of delivery, antenatal visit, breastfeeding and mother’s age. This study can guide the health system and the family members the measures to sustain higher coverage and retention of CHC which can further guide to the best possible health outcomes for the child.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".