Home is Where the Heart is: A Comparative Analysis of Home Birth Outcomes and Perceptions in the Developed World
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Home birth rates are increasing throughout the developed world, which necessitates a discussion regarding the outcomes and perceptions of home birth in developed countries. Home birth outcomes and perceptions are widely varied, and many have noted that there exists a relationship between a nation’s acceptance and integration of home birth into the standard model of maternity care and the nation’s home birth outcomes. This paper discusses a sample of developed countries, namely the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands, and seeks to identify the relationship between a nation’s home birth outcomes and its home birth perceptions. It was found that some countries, such as the United States, are reluctant to integrate home birth into the standard model of maternity care, and also have poor home birth outcomes. Countries like the Netherlands, by contrast, have created a standard maternity system that embraces and supports home birth. Home birth outcomes in these countries are exceptional. However, it was also found that no matter where a woman lives, the home birth is associated with fewer medical interventions, high rates of physiologic birth, and a strong sense of empowerment and autonomy. By comparing and contrasting home birth outcomes and perceptions in nations around the globe, our understanding of this growing phenomenon improves drastically and it becomes possible to create safer, better-integrated home birth systems.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".