Factors influencing the utilisation of antenatal care content in Uganda
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Uganda records an inadequate utilisation of antenatal care programmes. The study set out to investigate the factors associated with the use of antenatal care content to inform policy makers of the pertinent factors that need to be influenced by policy. METHOD: Data for the study was taken from a nationally representative Uganda Demographic and Health Survey (UDHS) 2006. The study employed both descriptive and community fixed effects approaches to examine the factors associated with the use of antenatal care content in Uganda. RESULTS: On average, only 16% of women used the full content of antenatal care. Only 12% of women had a urine sample taken, 28% a blood sample taken, and 53% their blood pressure measured. Almost two-thirds of women (63%) took iron supplements, 77% had their weight measured, and 27% were given drugs for intestinal parasites. The utilisation of the content of care was significantly associated with education of the mother and her partner, wealth status, location disparities, timing and frequency of antenatal visits, nature of facility visited, access to media, family planning, and utilisation of professional care. CONCLUSION: Efforts are needed to educate girls beyond secondary level, establish village outreach clinics with qualified staff to attract the hard to reach women in the rural areas, and facilitate antenatal care utilisation irrespective of the ability to pay.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it