MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2806787866 · doi:10.1186/s12913-018-3204-9

Impacts of online and group perinatal education: a mixed methods study protocol for the optimization of perinatal health services

2018· article· en· W2806787866 on OpenAlexafffund
Geneviève Roch, Roxane Borgès Da Silva, Francine de Montigny, Holly O. Witteman, Tamarha Pierce, Sonia Semenic, Julie Poissant, André-Anne Parent, Deena White, Nils Chaillet, Carl‐Ardy Dubois, Mathieu Ouimet, G Lapointe, Stéphane Turcotte, Alexandre Prud’homme, Geneviève Painchaud Guérard, Marie‐Pierre Gagnon

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Health Services Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalInstitut National de Santé Publique du QuébecCentre intégré de santé et de services sociaux de Chaudière-AppalachesMcGill UniversityHôpital Saint-François d'AssiseHEC MontréalUniversité LavalUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMax-Planck-GesellschaftFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsPrenatal careMedicineHealth informaticsHealth educationFocus groupNursing researchService (business)NursingMedical educationPublic healthFamily medicinePopulationEnvironmental healthSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Prenatal education is a core component of perinatal care and services provided by health institutions. Whereas group prenatal education is the most common educational model, some health institutions have opted to implement online prenatal education to address accessibility issues as well as the evolving needs of future parents. Various studies have shown that prenatal education can be effective in acquisition of knowledge on labour and delivery, reducing psychological distress and maximising father's involvement. However, these results may depend on educational material, organization, format and content. Furthermore, the effectiveness of online prenatal education compared to group prenatal education remains unclear in the literature. This project aims to evaluate the impacts of group prenatal education and online prenatal education on health determinants and users' health status, as well as on networks of perinatal educational services maintained with community-based partners. METHODS: This multipronged mixed methods study uses a collaborative research approach to integrate and mobilize knowledge throughout the process. It consists of: 1) a prospective cohort study with quantitative data collection and qualitative interviews with future and new parents; and 2) a multiple case study integrating documentary sources and interviews with stakeholders involved in the implementation of perinatal information service networks and collaborations with community partners. Perinatal health indicators and determinants will be compared between prenatal education groups (group prenatal education and online prenatal education) and standard care without these prenatal education services (control group). DISCUSSION: This study will provide knowledge about the impact of online prenatal education as a new technological service delivery model compared to traditional group prenatal education. Indicators related to the complementarity of these interventions and those available in community settings will refine our understanding of regional perinatal services networks. Results will assist decision-making regarding service organization and delivery models of prenatal education services. PROTOCOL VERSION: Version 1 (February 9 2018).

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)0.073
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.388

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0730.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0360.006

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.545
Teacher spread0.476 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations24
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Health Services ResearchSame topicGlobal Maternal and Child HealthFrench-language works237,207