MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W300101492 · doi:10.1016/j.ijgo.2015.02.005

The global epidemic of abuse and disrespect during childbirth: History, evidence, interventions, and FIGO's mother−baby friendly birthing facilities initiative

2015· review· en· W300101492 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineChildbirthPsychological interventionNursingAllianceFamily medicinePregnancyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent evidence indicates that disrespectful/abusive/coercive service delivery by skilled providers in facilities, which results in actual or perceived poor quality of care, is directly and indirectly associated with adverse maternal and newborn outcomes. The present article reviews the evidence for disrespectful/abusive care during childbirth in facilities (DACF), describes examples of DACF, discusses organizations active in a rights-based respectful maternity care movement, and enumerates some strategies and interventions that have been identified to decrease DACF. It concludes with a discussion of one strategy, which has been recently implemented by FIGO with global partners-the International Pediatrics Association, International Confederation of Midwives, the White Ribbon Alliance, and WHO. This strategy, the Mother and Baby Friendly Birth Facility (MBFBF) Initiative, is a criterion-based audit process based on human rights' doctrines, and modeled on WHO/UNICEF's Baby Friendly Facility Initiative.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.964
Threshold uncertainty score0.878

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.275 · 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