MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2588949029 · doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckv171.031

Qualitative Evaluation: Partners in Inner-city Integrated Prenatal Care Project in Winnipeg, Canada

2015· article· en· W2588949029 on OpenAlexaffabout
Maureen Heaman, Lynda Tjaden, Z Marzan Chang

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Public Health · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEvaluation and Performance Assessment
Canadian institutionsWinnipeg Regional Health AuthorityUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInner cityPrenatal careQualitative researchSociologyNursingGerontologyPolitical scienceMedicineEnvironmental healthSocioeconomicsSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Our previous research demonstrated high rates of inadequate prenatal care (PNC) among inner-city women in Winnipeg, Canada and identified barriers and facilitators related to use of PNC. Building on these findings, service providers, policy makers and researchers collaborated to develop the Partners in Inner-city Integrated Prenatal Care (PIIPC) Project, with the goal of reducing inequities in use of PNC. The objective of this qualitative component of the larger mixed-methods study was to explore the perspectives of women and health care providers about the PIIPC project. Methods A qualitative descriptive design was used. In-depth individual interviews were conducted with 22 postpartum women and 26 health care providers who participated in the PIIPC project. Purposeful and maximum variation sampling strategies were used. Interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed. Content analysis was used to identify themes and categories. Results The majority of women were single, low income, and self-identified as Indigenous. Women described access to PNC as convenient and coordinated. Key components included flexible scheduling and receiving incentives and assistance with transportation. Women commented on positive relationships with health care providers, using descriptors such as helpful, respectful, and nonjudgmental. A variety of health care providers participated in the interviews (physicians, midwives, nurses, social workers). Themes included better understanding of other programs, improved communication between programs, benefits of team work, and positive changes in service delivery (e.g., more accessible and convenient). Conclusions The PIIPC project reduced barriers to care and facilitated communication between programs, resulting in improved use of PNC by inner-city women. This project exemplifies how an integrated knowledge translation approach and building successful partnerships can contribute to health system improvements. Key messages The Partners in Inner-city Integrated Prenatal Care project was successful in reducing inequities in use of prenatal care among women who experience social and economic disadvantage Previous research findings were used to inform an integrated knowledge translation approach to design health system improvements that resulted in improved 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.457

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.642
GPT teacher head0.597
Teacher spread0.045 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Public HealthSame topicEvaluation and Performance AssessmentFrench-language works237,207