Motivations des agents obstétricaux qui décident d’exercer en milieu rural au Niger
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to determine the individual motivations influencing health professionals' decisions to work in rural areas. This study was conducted in three of the six districts of the Tillabery region in Niger (Tillabéry, Téra and Ouallam). METHODS: We conducted 102 in-depth interviews with health professionals (physicians, nurses and midwives), which were analysed according to thematic analysis with a mixed approach (inductive and deductive). RESULTS: Multiple individual motivations influence the choice to work in rural areas: the health professional's rural origin, the low cost of living, development of the professional career (to acquire a position of responsibility and to gain experience, working in the public health system) and social relations (superiors and communities). CONCLUSION: This study highlighted the complexity of individual motivation, which depends on a multitude of factors and is expressed differently according to individual trajectories. Improving access to public health service status, and a position of responsibility providing support to health personnel by district managers through positive and formative supervision could be initiatives to support the retention of health personnel in rural areas.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".