MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2976589809 · doi:10.17615/hc6w-b342

Afya Jamii: Evaluation of a Group Antenatal and Well-Child Care Program in Kenya

2019· article· en· W2976589809 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCarolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGrand Challenges CanadaGovernment of the United KingdomBill and Melinda Gates FoundationUnited States Agency for International Development
KeywordsGroup (periodic table)MedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: Facility-based group antenatal care has been implemented with success in high-income countries (HICs), but there is no literature describing implementation in Sub-Saharan Africa. We assessed the feasibility of implementing antenatal and well-child group care in public health facilities in western Kenya. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of uptake of health services from 5 group care and 9 comparison health facilities. We aimed to determine whether an antenatal and well-child group care model is feasible to implement within the public health system in Kenya. Results: Comparing group care and standard care health facilities, we found a statistically significant difference between the average monthly number of new Family Planning (FP) visits (41.5, 95% CI 36.1-46.9 and 32.3, 95% CI 29.2-35.5, p=0.004), the median monthly number of long-term FP visits (18, Interquartile Range (IQR) 11-29 and 11.5 IQR 4.5-26, p=0.001), and the median monthly number of newborns with low birth weight (0, IQR 0-1 and 1, IQR 0-3, p<0.001) at group and standard care health facilities, respectively. We found no difference in the primary outcome, the mean monthly number of the uptake of 4 or more ANC visits (28.7, 95% CI 25.8 to 31.6 and 25.9, 95% CI 24.0-27.8, p=0.104) or in the mean monthly number of facility deliveries (38.7, 95% CI 26.0-43.7 and 34.9, 95% CI 33.4-44.1, p=0.460) and OPV0 doses (35.1, 95% CI 29.7-40.6 and 36.8, 95% CI 32.7-41.0, p=0.616). Conclusion: Group antenatal care is a feasible health service delivery model in public health facilities in SSA. More research is needed to understand how facility-based group care can improve health outcomes for women and children in SSA.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.205 · 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