Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe the attitudes of nulliparas (women who have never given birth) about caesarean delivery on maternal request, and to examine their characteristics, perceptions and fears related to vaginal birth and caesarean delivery. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. PARTICIPANTS: Canadian nulliparas, 18 to 24 years of age, attending an educational institution. METHODS: A previously developed questionnaire was adapted, evaluated for validity and pretested. The questionnaire was presented in class by a research assistant. Participants placed questionnaires in a box to maintain confidentiality. The main outcome measure was participants' attitudes toward caesarean delivery on request. Descriptive, bivariate and multivariate regression statistical analyses were done. RESULTS: Of 260 women invited, 140 (53.8%) participated. Participants' mean age was 20.4 years, and 95 per cent were born in Quebec. The majority (63.3%) had heard about caesarean delivery on maternal request, but only 28.6 per cent had a favourable attitude toward it. Having fears about vaginal birth (p < 0.001), thinking that caesarean delivery was less stressful than vaginal birth (p = 0.042) and that vaginal birth had more negative consequences for the mother (p = 0.014) and a positive attitude of peers (p = 0.013) were four factors associated with a favourable attitude. For this group of respondents, these four factors would successfully predict attitudes to caesarean section upon maternal request 66.5 per cent of the time.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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".