MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2597867329 · doi:10.3138/jcfs.36.1.41

The Dynamics of Timing and Spacing of Births in Ghana

2005· article· en· W2597867329 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Stephen Obeng Gyimah

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative Family Studies · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemographySocioeconomic statusEthnic groupAffect (linguistics)FertilityGeographyPopulationPsychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Studying the dynamics of timing and spacing of births is important for several reasons including an understanding of differentials in completed family size and childhood mortality. In this paper, we test whether there are intrinsic socio-cultural factors that affect the transition between successive births in Ghana. Using data from the 1998 Ghana Demographic and Health Survey, it was found that although the socio-cultural factors were mediated by socio-economic and demographic factors, there was the persistence of ethnic differences. For instance, at all durations, Ewe and Mole-Dagbani wornen were found to have longer birth intervals than Akan women. These differences have been explained through ethnic differences in norms and practices such as lineage patterns, duration of post-partum abstinence and amenorrhoea. Besides the socioeconomic and socio-cultural factors, other consistently significant covariates were the length of the preceding birth interval, age at first birth, birth cohorts and the survival status of the index child.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations21
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative Family Studies→Same topicGlobal Maternal and Child Health→French-language works237,207→