A proposed mother-friendly childbirth model for Taiwanese women and obstetricians' attitudes toward it
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Pleasant and humane childbirth is every mother's wish. The objective of this study was to propose a practicable mother-friendly childbirth model tailored to Taiwanese women in order to improve the quality of perinatal care and maternal satisfaction. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this study, the guidelines of several countries were systematically reviewed, and a standard set of clinical guidelines were established by a focus group. In addition, a total of 172 Taiwanese obstetricians were visited, and a cross-sectional study of these obstetricians' attitudes toward the practicality and effectiveness of the model was performed using questionnaires. RESULTS: A total of 10 suggestions were developed for this woman-friendly childbirth model, including: (1) intermittent fetal monitoring for low-risk pregnancy, (2) no routine enema, (3) no routine perineal shaving, (4) no routine restricted oral intake, (5) no routine parenteral fluid support, (6) no routine elective amniotomy, (7) nonpharmacological pain management, (8) upright position during childbirth, (9) delayed pushing, and (10) restrictive episiotomy. Taiwanese obstetricians approved of no routine oral intake restriction and providing nonmedical pain relief. The majority of obstetricians disagreed that perineal shaving and routine elective amniotomy were necessary, and agreed to modify their practice according to the suggestions. Suggestions were still being debated, such as no routine parenteral fluid support, using an upright position for childbirth, and delayed pushing. Intermittent fetal monitoring for low-risk pregnancy, no routine enema, and restrictive episiotomy were questioned by many Taiwanese obstetricians. CONCLUSION: Several suggestions were made in this model. However, there was still no consensus of Taiwanese obstetricians. More evidence for the advantages and disadvantages of the various suggestions was needed to convince Taiwanese obstetrician to modify their routine practice.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".