ISQUA17-1957THE VALUE OF ARTS BASED METHODS TO EMPOWER PREGNANT AND POSTNATAL WOMEN TO SHARE THEIR SAFETY CONCERNS ABOUT SERIOUS ILLNESS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Emergencies during pregnancy and birth, while unusual, can develop rapidly and unexpectedly, with catastrophic consequences. Women's tacit knowledge of changes in their condition is an important resource to aid early detection and diagnosis, but women can worry about the legitimacy of their concerns, and struggle at times to express and get these taken seriously by staff. While there is a plethora of health information about maternity complications, it tends to be condition specific with an emphasis on technical rationality; lists of early warning signs may not map to women's experiences. This UK project was funded by the Cultural Institute at King's College London and involved a collaboration between health researchers and the cultural sector. The project aimed to co-design a film animation for pregnant and postnatal women to enable them to speak up and secure help for serious safety concerns. We planned to test as proof of concept its value with women and staff, and the feasibility of delivering the intervention as intended (engagement, acceptability and uptake).
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 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 | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".