Obstetrical Nurses’ Perspectives of Pregnant Women Who Use Illicit Substances and Their Provision of Care: A Thematic Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The growing number of pregnant women using illicit substances presents a serious public health concern. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to explore obstetrical nurses' perspectives toward caring for pregnant women who use illicit substances in a large inner-city hospital in Western Canada. METHODS: Guided by an interpretivist and social constructivist epistemological approach, I engaged in a thematic content analysis of qualitative semistructured interviews. In total 18 registered nurses from multiple obstetrical units were recruited. RESULTS: Four major themes were identified: (i) services and care were recognized through elements of caring, creating a welcoming environment, and providing client-centered care; (ii) stigma and discrimination impacted nurses preconceptions of care; (iii) coping mechanisms were necessary when struggling professionally; and (iv) recommendations of continuing specialized education were identified. CONCLUSION: Obstetrical nurses highlighted a number of conflicting views about caring for pregnant women who use illicit substances. Key actions, such as establishing professional support when nurses experience ethical distress or when they are unable to provide meaningful care to patients, were suggested. Strong recommendations for ongoing professional development, as well as increased educational opportunities during prelicensure programs were made in order to support nurses in their role.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".