Home birth preference, childbirth, and newborn care practices in rural Peruvian Amazon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Home birth is very common in the Peruvian Amazon. In rural areas of the Loreto region, home to indigenous populations such as the Kukama-Kukamiria, birth takes place at home constantly. This study aims to understand the preference for home births as well as childbirth and newborn care practices among Kukama-Kukamiria women in rural Loreto. Following a case study approach, sixty semi-structured, face-to-face interviews were conducted with recent mothers who experienced childbirth within one year prior to the interview, female relatives of recent mothers who had a role in childbirth, male relatives of recent mothers, community health workers, and traditional healers. We found that for women from these communities, home birth is a courageous act and an intimate (i.e. members of the community and relatives participate in it) and inexpensive practice in comparison with institutional birth. These preferences are also linked to experiences of mistreatment at health facilities, lack of cultural adaptation of birthing services, and access barriers to them. Preparations for home births included handwashing and cleaning delivery surfaces. After birth, waiting for the godparent to arrive to cut the cord can delay drying of the newborn. Discarding of colostrum, lack of skin-to-skin contact as well as a range of responses regarding immediate breastfeeding and immediate drying of the baby were also found. These findings were used to tailor the educational content of the Mamas del Rio program, where community health workers are trained to identify pregnancy early, perform home visits to pregnant women and newborns, and promote essential newborn care practices in case institutional birth is not desired or feasible. We make recommendations to improve Peru's cultural adaptation of birthing services.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".