MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3020566287 · doi:10.7189/jogh.10.010418

The contribution of district prioritization on maternal and newborn health interventions coverage in rural India

2020· article· en· W3020566287 on OpenAlexaff
BM Ramesh, Bidyadhar Dehury, Shajy Isac, Vikas Gothalwal, Ravi Prakash, Vasanthakumar Namasivayam, Shivalingappa S. Halli, James Blanchard, Ties Boerma

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Global Health · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaCentre for Global Health Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrioritizationPsychological interventionEnvironmental healthRural areaRural healthMedicineGeographyNursingBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The contribution of district prioritization on maternal and newborn health interventions coverage in rural IndiaBackground In 2001, India prioritized eight most socioeconomically disadvantaged states known as Empowered Action Group (EAG) states and in 2013, it prioritized 190 of the 718 as high priority districts (HPDs) to accelerate the decline in maternal and newborn mortality.This paper assesses whether the HPDs achieved a greater coverage of maternal and newborn health interventions than the non-HPDs and HPDs in EAG states achieved greater coverage than those in non-EAG states. MethodsWe used data from the Sample Registration System to assess rural neonatal mortality trends in EAG states and all India.We computed a co-coverage index based on seven maternal and newborn health interventions from the 2015/16 National Family Health Survey.Difference in differences (DID) analyses were used to examine the contribution of district prioritization, considering the HPDs and the illiterate as treatment groups and 2013 as the time cut-off for the pre-and post-treatment. ResultsNeonatal mortality declined in rural India from 36 to 27 per 1000 live births during 2010-2016 at 4.5% per year.Four EAG states experienced faster rates of decline than the national rate.From 2013, the co-coverage index increased significantly more in the HPDs compared to non-HPDs (DID = 0.11, P ≤ 0.005).The district prioritization effect on co-coverage was statistically significant in only EAG states (DID = 0.13, P ≤ 0.05).The coverage gains for illiterate mothers were greater than for literate mothers, especially in the HPDs. ConclusionsThe district prioritization in India is associated with greater improvements in the coverage of maternal and newborn health services in EAG states and the HPDs, including reductions in inequalities within those states and districts.There are however still large gaps between states and districts and within districts by the mother' s literacy status that need further prioritization to make progress towards the SDG targets by 2030.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Global HealthSame topicGlobal Maternal and Child HealthFrench-language works237,207