MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W31108570 · doi:10.1002/wcs.1504

Understanding women’s empowerment and maternal mortality in the Ugandan context: effects of mitigative intervention strategies

2010· article· en· W31108570 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Quinn Marisa Rose Metcalfe

Bibliographic record

VenueWiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Cognitive Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSimon Fraser University
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Intervention (counseling)EmpowermentMedicineWomen's empowermentPolitical scienceNursingHistoryLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In an international context of increasing attention to maternal health and unacceptable rates of maternal death, disease and disability in many regions of the world, more resources will become available to address the issue. In the case of maternal mortality in Uganda,framing of the issue has implications for the effectiveness of attempted interventions. While women’s subordinate status in Ugandan society has been recognized as an important contributing factor in high maternal death rates, it is largely considered to be an intractable artefact of social and cultural beliefs and practices. Interventions informed by this framework can at best hope to mitigate the effects of an unfortunate reality. The root issue of women’s lack of empowerment is therefore not often addressed within large scale maternal health interventions, contributing to a continued need for mitigation, and potentially increasing women’s social disempowerment to reinforce the cycle of poor maternal health.

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)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.330 · 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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Cognitive ScienceSame topicGlobal Maternal and Child HealthFrench-language works237,207