Exploring community midwives' perceptions of their work experience after deployment in the rural areas of Chitral, Pakistan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims: To explore the perceptions of community midwives about their work experiences after deployment in the rural settings of Chitral, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Methods: A qualitative descriptive approach was used, conducting in-depth semi-structured interviews with 13 community midwives. Findings: The three major themes that emerged from the analysis of the data were: (1) rural community midwives' perceptions of their role and competencies, (2) factors facilitating and hindering the rural community midwives' ability to function, and (3) continuation of community midwives' services in the future. Conclusions: The study findings highlighted the factors that empower and obstruct community midwives in providing services in rural areas. The majority of the community midwives felt empowered because of their increased earning capacity and enhanced competencies in performing their roles. However, some of them shared challenges in terms of socio-cultural and financial constraints. These findings have important implications for midwives working in rural areas.
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 | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".