MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2883649459 · doi:10.1186/s12913-018-3357-6

When, where and who? Accessing health facility delivery care from the perspective of women and men in Tanzania: a qualitative study

2018· article· en· W2883649459 on OpenAlexaff
Thecla W. Kohi, Lilian Teddy Mselle, Justine Dol, Megan Aston

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Health Services Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersUnited Nations Population Fund
KeywordsChildbirthTanzaniaMedicineHealth facilityQualitative researchThematic analysisFocus groupPublic healthHealth administrationHealth careNursing researchNursingFamily medicineEnvironmental healthPopulationPregnancySocioeconomicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Childbirth is a momentous event for women and their partners, yet women continue to die in childbirth worldwide, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa. To reduce maternal mortality and increase the number of women delivering at health facilities, it is important to understand reasons why women who do deliver at health facilities chose to do so. Therefore, the objective of this qualitative study was to explore the perceptions of women and men on (i) when women go to the hospital; (ii) where women deliver; and (iii) who is involved in the delivery process related to accessing health facilities for delivery care in Tanzania. METHODS: Using a qualitative design, four focus group discussions (n = 23) and semi-structured interviewers (n = 12) were held with postnatal women and men who were attending a postnatal clinic in the Lake Zone region of Tanzania. Data was analyzed using thematic coding. RESULTS: Women and men expressed factors that influenced when, where, and with whom they accessed health facilities for delivery care, with the quality of care received providing a significant influence. When decisions were made about going to the hospital, there were challenges that resulted in delayed treatment seeking; however, couples recognized the need to seek care earlier to prevent complications. Private hospitals were the preferred location for delivery with public hospitals and home deliveries with traditional birth attendants being less desirable. Both when and where delivery took place was influenced by the desire for better quality of care received as well as financial costs. Finally, there was mixed evidence on who was involved in decision making around delivery location from the perspective of women and men, but both groups expressed a preference for more male involvement during the delivery. CONCLUSION: Men and women show desire for women to delivery at health facilities; however, improvements are needed with respect to maternal care and humanizing the birth process in Tanzania. Greater emphasis needs to be placed on including men during the birth process, improving the quality of care received in public hospitals, and reducing the barriers to accessing health facilities for delivery care.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.223
Threshold uncertainty score0.922

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.470
Teacher spread0.403 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations38
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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