MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2986061556 · doi:10.1145/3311957.3359463

(In)visible Choices: Articulation Work and the Rise in US Maternal Mortality

2019· article· en· W2986061556 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ashley Marie Walker, Michael Ann DeVito, Kathryn E. Ringland, Madhu Reddy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicQualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChildbirthPublic healthHealth careWork (physics)Maternal deathStatisticMaternal healthMedicineNursingPublic relationsPolitical scienceEnvironmental healthPopulationPregnancyHealth services

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The US maternal mortality is double that of the UK and Canada and still rising. This is a public health crisis, and draws our attention to systemic issues with US health care, as maternal mortality is a core statistic used to indicate health care quality. Responding to the increasing number of women dying during one of the most common experiences with the medical system will require organizing a diverse group of stakeholders over a long period of time. Due to the unevenly distributed nature of the crisis, with Black women 243% more likely to die in childbirth or from childbirth-related causes will also require us to incorporate underrepresented voices into the current system. To examine these issues, we conducted interviews with public health experts working to address maternal mortality. We found that articulation work practices in public health limit the ability of experts to initiate contact with the very stakeholders they need to build relationships with to address the rise in maternal mortality.

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 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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.134
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.150
GPT teacher head0.517
Teacher spread0.367 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicQualitative Research Methods and EthicsFrench-language works237,207