MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011471818 · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2020.00073

WOmen's Action for Mums and Bubs (WOMB) Trial Protocol: A Non-randomized Stepped Wedge Implementation Trial of Participatory Women's Groups to Improve the Health of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Mothers and Children in Australia

2020· article· en· W3011471818 on OpenAlexaff
Karen Carlisle, Catrina Felton‐Busch, Yvonne Cadet‐James, Judy Taylor, Ross Bailie, Jane Farmer, Megan Passey, Veronica Matthews, Emily Callander, Rebecca Evans, Janet Kelly, Robyn Preston, Michelle Redman‐MacLaren, Haylee Fox, Adrian Esterman, Merrick Zwarenstein, Sarah Larkins

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Public Health · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityCentre for Family Medicine
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilRussian Science Foundation
KeywordsEmpowermentMedicineNursingIndigenousRandomized controlled trialParticipatory action researchIntervention (counseling)Cluster randomised controlled trialAuditFamily medicineSociologyEconomic growthBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: In Australia, there have been improvements in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander maternal health, however inequities remain. There is increasing international evidence illustrating the effectiveness of Participatory Women’s Groups (PWGs) in improving Maternal and Child Health (MCH) outcomes. Using a non-randomised, cluster stepped-wedge implementation of a complex intervention with mixed methods evaluation, this study aims to test the effectiveness of PWGs in improving MCH within Indigenous primary care settings in Australia and how they operate in various contexts. Methods: This study takes place in ten primary health care services across Australia and involves the recruitment of existing PWGs or the setting up of new PWGs. Services are paired based on geography for practical reasons and two services commence the PWG intervention at three monthly intervals, with the initial four services being those with existing women’s groups. Implementation of the PWGs as an intervention involves training local facilitators of PWG groups, supported engagement with local MCH data through workshops, PWGs identifying and prioritising issues and strengths and co-implementing solutions with health services. Outcomes are measured with yearly MCH audits, a cost-effectiveness study, and process evaluation of community participation and empowerment. Discussion: This study is the first to formally implement and quantitatively, yet with contextual awareness, measure the effect of applying a community participation intervention to improve the quality of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander MCH in Australia. Findings from this work, including detailed theory-producing qualitative analysis, will produce new knowledge of how to facilitate improved quality of MCH care in Indigenous PHC settings and how to best engage community in driving health care improvements. Trial registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): ACTRN12618000945224 Web address: http://www.ANZCTR.org.au/ACTRN12618000945224.aspx

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.002

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.353 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Public HealthSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207