Perceptions of barriers, facilitators and motivators related to use of prenatal care: A qualitative descriptive study of inner-city women in Winnipeg, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this qualitative descriptive study was to explore the perceptions of women living in inner-city Winnipeg, Canada, about barriers, facilitators, and motivators related to their use of prenatal care. METHODS: Individual, semi-structured interviews were conducted in person with 26 pregnant or postpartum women living in inner-city neighborhoods with high rates of inadequate prenatal care. Interviews averaged 67 min in length. Recruitment of participants continued until data saturation was achieved. Inductive content analysis was used to identify themes and subthemes under four broad topics of interest (barriers, facilitators, motivators, and suggestions). Sword's socio-ecological model of health services use provided the theoretical framework for the research. This model conceptualizes service use as a product of two interacting systems: the personal and situational attributes of potential users and the characteristics of health services. RESULTS: Half of the women in our sample were single and half self-identified as Aboriginal. Participants discussed several personal and system-related barriers affecting use of prenatal care, such as problems with transportation and child care, lack of prenatal care providers, and inaccessible services. Facilitating factors included transportation assistance, convenient location of services, positive care provider qualities, and tangible rewards. Women were motivated to attend prenatal care to gain knowledge and skills and to have a healthy baby. CONCLUSION: Consistent with the theoretical framework, women's utilization of prenatal care was a product of two interacting systems, with several barriers related to personal and situational factors affecting women's lives, while other barriers were related to problems with service delivery and the broader healthcare system. Overcoming barriers to prenatal care and capitalizing on factors that motivate women to seek prenatal care despite difficult living circumstances may help improve use of prenatal care by inner-city women.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".