MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953356786 · doi:10.1097/grf.0000000000000472

Positive Deviance to Address Health Equity in Quality and Safety in Obstetrics

2019· review· en· W2953356786 on OpenAlex
Elizabeth A. Howell, Zainab Ahmed, Shoshanna Sofaer, Jennifer Zeitlin

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Obstetrics & Gynecology · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsWomen's Health Research Institute
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities
KeywordsMedicinePositive devianceEthnic groupHealth equityEquity (law)Deviance (statistics)ObstetricsFamily medicineNursingPublic healthSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Racial/ethnic disparities persist in obstetrical outcomes. In this paper, we ask how research in obstetrical quality can go beyond a purely quantitative approach to tackle the challenge of health inequity in quality and safety. This overview debriefs the use of positive deviance and mixed methods in others areas of medicine, describes the shortcomings of quantitative methods in obstetrics and presents qualitative studies carried out in obstetrics as well as the insights provided by this method. The article concludes by proposing positive deviance as a mixed methods approach to generate new knowledge for addressing racial and ethnic disparities in maternal outcomes.

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.

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)0.052
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.937
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.052
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.406
GPT teacher head0.591
Teacher spread0.185 · 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