MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2806128283 · doi:10.1186/s41256-018-0074-y

Disparities in caesarean section prevalence and determinants across sub-Saharan Africa countries

2018· article· en· W2806128283 on OpenAlexaff
Sanni Yaya, Olalekan A. Uthman, Agbessi Amouzou, Ghose Bishwajit

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Health Research and Policy · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaInternational Development Research Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCaesarean sectionPublic healthMedicineEnvironmental healthSection (typography)DemographyPregnancyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Access to safe Cesarean section (C-section) in resource-constrained settings such as sub-Sahara Africa (SSA) region is a foremost approach to reduce maternal mortality. C-section is an obstetric operative procedure used appropriately to improve delivery outcomes. However, errors in the procedure have enormous potential harm that may outweigh the benefits. This study assessed the prevalence and determinants of C-section in several SSA countries. This study examined the prevalence and determinants associated with cesarean delivery in SSA countries. METHODS: Secondary data of women of reproductive age (15-49 years) from the current Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) in 34 SSA countries was utilized in this study. The mode of delivery among women was the primary outcome variable. Percentage and descriptive statistics were used to conduct univariate analyses. Furthermore, multivariable multilevel logistic regression was used to investigate correlates of C-section among SSA women. RESULTS: Results showed disparities in the percentage of C-section among women from 34 SSA countries. C-section at public healthcare settings ranged from 3% in Burkina Faso to 15.6% in Ghana. However, in private healthcare settings, C-section ranged from 0% in Sao Tome and Principe to 64.2% in Rwanda. Overall, C-section was 7.9% from public healthcare and 12.3% from private healthcare facilities respectively. In the adjusted regression model; women aged 35-49 had increase in the odds of C-section, while a unit increase in the number of children ever born had 17 and 20% significant reduction in the odds of C-section in public and private healthcare respectively. Assessing public healthcare settings; women from richer/richest households, male and large size children at birth had increase in the odds of C-section, while those from rich neighbourhood had reduction in the odds of C-section. In private healthcare settings, women with high decision making power and multiple births had increase in the odds of C-section, while those who attended ANC visits had significant reduction in the odds of C-section. CONCLUSION: The findings from this study would help formulate health policies and implement actions that would improve the outcome of C-section care. Monitoring of emergency obstetric care services is necessary to address issues connected to poor C-section outcomes in resource-constrained settings. Also training of medical personnel including midwives and nurses in emergency obstetric care, ensuring accessibility to life-saving drugs and supplies should be encouraged in health care system.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.524
Teacher spread0.401 · 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

Citations126
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Health Research and PolicySame topicMaternal and Perinatal Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207