An Observational Study of Umbilical Cord Clamping and Care Practices during Home Deliveries in Central Uganda
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Delayed umbilical cord clamping and care practices have important implications for infant iron stores and neonatal survival. This is especially important in countries like Uganda, where there is a high prevalence of anemia in women and children coupled with a high newborn mortality rate. This study assesses cord clamping and care practices in home births in a coverage area of 12 health centers in 4 districts near Kampala, Uganda. We interviewed 147 women, most of who had at least primary school education and delivered their babies in the homes of traditional birth attendants. Only 65% of the persons conducting delivery washed hands, and most wore gloves. Most frequent cord ties were threads (86.7%), and glove rims (8.3%). Cords were cut with clean instruments in most (93.1%) deliveries. During cord clamping, newborn was positioned at a higher level than mother in 59%, delayed clamping (≥3mins) was reported in 52%. Combination of delayed clamping and positioning of newborn at mother’s level or lower was reported in only 19%. Substances used for cord care included surgical spirit (42.4%), local herbs (24.5%), powder (22.6%), ash (21.6%), saline water (10.3%), and tea (2.8%). Cord care instructions given most commonly were: cleaning with warm saline water (27%), spirit or antiseptics (25%), and herb application (7%). Awareness regarding cord infections was poor (20%). Mother’s education level, and age were not associated with cord clamping or care practices. Our study indicates scope for interventions to help improve hemoglobin levels in infancy. Education regarding cord care practices may reduce infections.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".