A Household Survey to Evaluate Access to Surgical Care in Vanuatu
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Surgical care is an integral part of any healthcare system, yet there is a paucity of data on the burden of surgical disease, surgical capacity and access to surgical services in the Pacific region. This study aimed to evaluate access to surgical care through a pilot household survey in the Vanuatu island of Efate and five of its surrounding islands. METHODS: The 2009 Vanuatu census' GPS coordinates were used to randomly select 150 rural and 150 urban households from Efate and its surrounding islands. A total of 143 urban households and 142 rural households were available for inclusion in this study. A household questionnaire was developed to evaluate access to surgical care and included information regarding household demographics, socio-economic indicators and perceived and realised barriers to accessing care. The questionnaire was administered by local health workers, and data were collected electronically. RESULTS: Questionnaires were completed by 285 households. Two hundred and forty-one out of 254 (94.8%) households reported being able to access Port Vila Hospital, if required. The most commonly cited potential barriers to accessing surgical care were financial constraints (42.4%) and transport (26.4%). CONCLUSION: Our results provide important insights into the geographic, sociocultural and economic barriers to seeking, reaching and receiving surgical care in this region of Vanuatu. Identifying specific areas and communities with poor access to care, alongside the determinants of access, will help in designing both clinical and policy interventions to improve access to surgical care.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".