Saving lives with caring assessments: How Tanzanian nurse‐midwives and obstetricians negotiate postpartum practices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To explore the nurse-midwives' and obstetricians' experiences delivering postpartum care assessments and how it was constructed through personal, social and institutional discourses. INTRODUCTION: The Tanzanian Government has prioritised maternal and child health as an urgent healthcare issue. Nurse-midwives and obstetricians are the two main providers of care throughout the prenatal and postpartum periods. DESIGN: A qualitative design guided by a feminist poststructuralist methodology. METHODS: Ten nurse-midwives and three obstetricians from three Regional Hospitals in Dar es Salaam participated in individual semi-structured in-depth interviews. RESULTS: Assessment emerged as a significant theme with three subthemes. Nurse-midwives shared their beliefs and values about assessments that focused on the safety of mothers and babies. They felt proud working with mothers and babies and shared their frustrations having to deal with inadequate working conditions. Guidelines and practices were part of the institutional discourse that impacted the day-to-day experiences of nurse-midwives and obstetricians. The nurse-midwives held the belief that it was vital to complete a comprehensive assessment to identify danger signs, keep mothers and babies safe and look for any abnormalities. They were concerned that mothers were being sent home too early. CONCLUSIONS: Nurse-midwives' experiences in the provision of postpartum care portray that these health providers work heartedly to make sure that the mothers and their newborns receive the best care they can provide. The health system is challenged to address the needed supplies and equipment for reproductive health in particular postpartum care services. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Institutional health discourses significantly affect the practice of nurse-midwives and obstetricians to deliver timely and effective postpartum assessments. Immediate and ongoing postpartum assessments conducted by nurse-midwives and obstetricians can save lives. This study presents the first theme of the study: Caring assessments save lives.
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 | 0.014 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".