WOMEN's Knowledge of Obstetric Danger signs in Ethiopia (WOMEN's KODE):a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: According to the 2015 World Health Organization report, globally, an estimated 10.7 million mothers died from 1990 to 2015 due to obstetric complications. This report showed that almost all global maternal deaths (99%) occurred in developing countries and two thirds of these deaths took place in sub-Saharan Africa where the majority of women lack knowledge about obstetric danger signs. In Ethiopia, in several research reports, it has been indicated that women have poor knowledge about obstetric danger signs. Although several studies have been conducted to assess women's knowledge of obstetric danger signs, to date, no systematic review has been conducted in Ethiopia. Therefore, this review is aimed at synthesising the existing literature about women's knowledge of obstetric danger signs. METHODS: We systematically searched for articles from MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar and Maternity and Infant Care databases. A combination of search terms including 'knowledge' or 'awareness' or 'information' and 'pregnancy danger signs' or 'obstetric danger signs' or 'obstetric warning signs' and 'Ethiopia' was used to locate appropriate articles. Two reviewers conducted article screening and data abstraction independently. Observational studies published in English and conducted in Ethiopia to date were assessed for quality using the adapted Newcastle Ottawa Scale for cross-sectional studies. The PRISMA checklist was used to present the findings of this systematic review. RESULTS: From the 215 articles initially screened by abstracts and titles, 12 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. All the studies reported women's knowledge of obstetric danger signs during pregnancy, ten articles reported on the level of knowledge during delivery and eight studies reported on the level of knowledge of danger signs during the postpartum period. The pooled random effect meta-analysis level of women's knowledge about obstetric danger signs during pregnancy, delivery and postpartum was 48%, 43% and 32%, respectively. Maternal age, education, income, health service use, distance from facility and women's autonomy were reported in several studies as determinants of women's knowledge of obstetric danger signs. CONCLUSIONS: Women's knowledge about obstetric danger signs in Ethiopia was very poor, which could hamper access to obstetric care when women encounter obstetric complications. Counselling services during antenatal care and community-based health information dissemination about obstetric danger signs should be strengthened. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42017077000.
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 | 0.016 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.024 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".