MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963573770 · doi:10.7189/jogh.09.010320

An intersectional analysis of maternal mortality in Sub-Saharan Africa: a human rights issue

2019· review· en· W2963573770 on OpenAlexaff
Judah Batist

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Global Health · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman rightsMaternal healthMEDLINEPolitical scienceGeographyEnvironmental healthMedicinePopulationHealth servicesLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ub-Saharan Africa continues to possess the highest rates of maternal mortality across the globe. In recent years, it was estimated that almost half of all global maternal fatalities from pregnancy-related complications occurred in Sub-Saharan Africa. There has been a decline in the rates of maternal mortality in Sub-Saharan Africa since 1990. However, these rates are not uniformly distributed across the region and remain troublingly high relative to the global front Importantly, since the overwhelming majority of maternal deaths from pregnancy-related complications are a result of the inequitable and oppressive conditions plaguing that region, maternal mortality is a human rights issue. This article posits that maternal mortality in Sub-Saharan Africa is a violation of human rights through an analysis of the intersecting social determinants of gender, economics and education in the regional context. Maternal mortality must be framed and understood as a fundamental human rights issue in order to effectively ameliorate this systemic global health burden and promote human flourishing.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.384 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations45
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Global HealthSame topicGlobal Maternal and Child HealthFrench-language works237,207