Quality of care in the delivery room: Focusing on respectful maternal care practices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study provided a descriptive overview of the care provided in the delivery room focused on respectful maternity care as perceived by women during labor and delivery in a maternity and child health hospital in Egypt. The dimensions examined were those related to services that arepatient-friendly, free of abuse, timely and free of discrimination. A cross-sectional retrospective study was conducted at the postpartum department in Minia University Maternity and Child Health Hospital in Minia, Egypt. Purposive sampling technique was used to recruit participants from a population of postpartum women who delivered their babies in the hospital, received delivery services from 6 hours to 7 days before the study period. The 15-item Respectful Maternal Care (RMC) Scale was used for this study. A total of 580 questionnaires were distributed to the postpartum women in the hospital and 501 were completed and collected giving a retrieval rate of 86.4%. The findings indicated that majority of the postpartum mothers felt that they received friendly care, abuse-free care and a timely care on a moderate degree during childbirth. Generally, the postpartum mothers felt that they received a high degree of discrimination free care during childbirth. Overall, the postpartum mothers in this study experienced moderate degree of respectful maternity care during childbirth. Although the general findings show moderate respectful maternity care, more than fifty percent of the postpartum mothers experienced being shouted at by healthcare workers and more than half of the postpartum mothers claim that they were not given prompt service by the healthcare workers and waiting time is long. These aspects of maternity care need to be improved.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".