Use of reproductive health care services among urban migrant women in Bangladesh
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent internal migration flows from rural to urban areas pose challenges to women using reproductive health care services in their migratory destinations. No studies were found which examined the relationship between migration, migration-associated indicators and reproductive health care services in Bangladesh. METHODS: We analyzed the 2006 Bangladesh Urban Health Survey (data made publically available in June 2013) of 14,191 ever-married women aged 10-59 years. Cross tabulations and logistic regression were conducted. RESULTS: Migrants and non-migrants did not differ significantly in their use of modern contraceptives and treatment for STI but were less likely to receive ANC even after controlling for a range of variables. Compared to non-migrants, more migrants had home births, did not take vitamin A after delivery, and had no medical exam post-birth. Migrant women being village-born (rather than urban-born) were associated with risk of diminished: use of ANC; treatment for STI; medical exam post-birth; vitamin A post-birth. Migrating for work or education (rather than other reasons) was associated with risk of diminished: use of ANC; use of modern facilities for birth; and medical exam post-birth. Each additional year lived in urban areas was associated with a greater likelihood of receiving ANC. CONCLUSIONS: Women who migrated to urban areas in Bangladesh were significantly less likely than non-migrants to use reproductive health care services related to pregnancy care. Pro-actively identifying migrant women, especially those who originated from villages or migrated for work or education may be warranted to ensure optimal use of pregnancy-related services.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".