Understanding healthy pregnancies: the perspective of Inuit midwives in northwestern Quebec.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: For 25 years, Inuit midwives have provided perinatal and newborn care for about 90% of the pregnancies in northwestern Quebec. Patients in this region continue to have high rates of preventable nutritional deficiencies. The objective of this study was to explore the perceptions of professional midwives and students about what makes a healthy pregnancy and a healthy newborn. METHODS: We convened, via teleconference, a semistructured focus group with the local midwives and students. The conversation focused on local understanding of a healthy pregnancy and a healthy newborn, and the role of midwives in the communities. RESULTS: Four midwives and 6 students took part in the focus group, representing 80% of local midwives and students. All of the participants were women, and their professional experience ranged from 3 to 25 years. Through inductive thematic analysis, it became apparent that personal experiences and professional training were important determinants of opinions. Midwives believed that the health of women and infants could be improved through better food selection, particularly reliance on traditional nutrient-rich food. They were aware that iron deficiency was a problem and that infants required vitamin D; however, they reported that supplement uptake was poor. CONCLUSION: Concern was expressed about a decline in traditional beliefs and about unhealthy behaviours. Participants advanced strategies to promote knowledge locally (e.g., visual aids, local radio) to attempt to reduce rates of nutritional deficiencies.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".