Barriers and facilitators to humanizing birth care in Tanzania: findings from semi-structured interviews with midwives and obstetricians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In Tanzania, the provision of humanized care is increasingly being emphasized in midwifery practice, yet studies regarding perceptions and practices of skilled health personnel towards the humanization of birth care are scare. Previous reviews have identified that abuse and disrespect is not limited to individuals but reflects systematic failures and deeply embedded provider attitudes and beliefs. Therefore, the current study aims to explore the perceptions and practices of skilled health personnel on humanizing birth care in Tanzania by identifying current barriers and facilitators. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were held with skilled health personnel including midwives (n = 6) and obstetricians (n = 2) working in the two district hospitals of Tanzania. Data were analyzed using thematic coding. RESULTS: Skilled health personnel identified systematic barriers to providing humanizing birth care. Systematic barriers included lack of space and limited facilities. Institutional norms and practices prohibited family involvement during the birth process,including beliefs that limited choice of birth position as well as disrespected beliefs, traditions, and culture. Participants also acknowledged four facilitators that improve the likelihood of humanized care during childbirth in Tanzania: ongoing education of skilled health personnel on respectful maternal care, institutional norms designed for continuous clinic support during childbirth, belief in the benefit of having family become active participants, and respecting maternal wishes when appropriate. CONCLUSION: To move forward with humanizing the birth process in Tanzania, it will be essential that systematic barriers are addressed as well as changing the mindset of personnel towards respectful maternal care. It will be essential for the government and private hospitals to revalue their labour wards to increase the space and staff allocated to each mother to enhance family-integrated care. Additionally, in-service training as well as incorporation of respectful maternal care during pre-service training is key to changing the culture in the labour ward.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".