MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3007964467 · doi:10.20381/ruor-24349

Understanding Maternal Care Preferences and Perceptions to Curb Maternal Mortality in Rural Africa

2020· dissertation· en· W3007964467 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Arone Fantaye

Bibliographic record

VenueuO Research (University of Ottawa) · 2020
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsPerceptionMaternal healthGeographyPsychologyMedicinePolitical scienceEconomic growthEnvironmental healthEconomicsPopulationHealth services

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The underutilization of formal, facility-based maternal care is a major contributor to the high maternal mortality rates among women living in rural Africa. Increasing the use of formal maternal care requires exploration of important maternal health issues affecting community members and comprehension of how they perceive the use of formal and traditional maternal care. This thesis aimed to identify the key factors, challenges, and needs of rural populations for the uptake of formal maternal care. Paper 1 explored rural women's preferred choices for sources of maternal care as well as the factors that contribute to their preferences in Africa. Paper 2 explored elders' perceptions about reasons for the underutilization of maternal healthcare and maternal death, as well as potential solutions to improve formal care use in rural Nigeria. Methods: 1) In paper 1, a systematic search on Ovid Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and Global Health identified 40 qualitative studies that elicited women's preferences for maternal care in rural Africa. Reviewers collated the findings and reported on patterns identified across findings using the narrative synthesis method. 2) Data were collected through 9 community conversations with 158 elders in 9 rural Nigerian communities. The data were analyzed inductively through thematic analysis. Results: 1) A variety of preferences for formal, traditional and both formal and traditional maternal care during antepartum, intrapartum and postpartum periods were identified. The majority of the studies reported preferences for formal antenatal care or a combination of traditional and formal antenatal care. During intrapartum, rural women held a wide range of preferences, including facility-based births, traditional births in a domestic setting, as well as a combination of formal and traditional care depending on the onset of complications. The majority of the studies reported preferences for traditional postnatal care involving traditional attendants, self-care, and cultural rituals that fend off witchcraft. The factors that contributed to these preferences were related to the perceived need of formal or traditional maternal care, accessibility to formal or traditional care, and cultural and religious norms, beliefs and obligations. 2) The perceived reasons for the underuse of formal maternal care included poor qualities of care, physical and financial inaccessibility of facility-based services, and lack of knowledge and awareness. Reasons for women's maternal deaths included malaria and blood displacement, facility-based service deficiencies, uptake of traditional maternal care, and poor community awareness and negligence. Increased access to high-quality care, health promotion and education, community support and supernatural assistance were the proffered solutions. Conclusions: The major areas that need improvement across rural Africa include human and material resources availability, technical and interpersonal quality of care in health facilities, physical accessibility, financial accessibility, sociocultural accessibility, cultural and religious sensitivity, and community knowledge and awareness. Generally, the findings reflect the need for multifaceted interventions that engage target populations and consider local contexts, realities, and related needs in order to develop locally acceptable interventions. Such interventions will increase the likelihood of effective and long-lasting positive changes in healthcare utilization and 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueuO Research (University of Ottawa)→Same topicGlobal Maternal and Child Health→French-language works237,207→