MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3180306584 · doi:10.1101/2021.07.13.21260207

Global research priorities for COVID-19 in maternal, reproductive and child health: results of an international survey

2021· preprint· en· W3180306584 on OpenAlexaff
Melanie Etti, Jackeline Alger, Sofía P. Salas, Robin Saggers, Tanusha Ramdin, Margit Endler, Kristina Gemzell‐Danielsson, Tobias Alfvén, Yusuf Ahmed, Allison Callejas, Deborah Eskenazi, Asma Khalil, Kirsty Le Doaré

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 Impact on Reproduction
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDelphi methodThematic analysisFamily medicineReproductive healthPandemicBreastfeedingMedicineMedical educationCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PsychologyNursingQualitative researchPopulationEnvironmental healthPediatricsSociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The World Health Organization’s “ Coordinated Global Research Roadmap: 2019 Novel Coronavirus ” outlined the need for research that focuses on the impact of COVID-19 on pregnant women and children. More than one year after the first reported case, significant knowledge gaps remain, highlighting the need for a coordinated approach. To address this need, the Maternal, Newborn and Child Health Working Group (MNCH WG) of the COVID-19 Clinical Research Coalition conducted an international survey to identify global research priorities for COVID-19 in maternal, reproductive and child health. Method This project was undertaken using a modified Delphi method. An electronic questionnaire was disseminated to clinicians and researchers in three different languages (English, French and Spanish) via MNCH WG affiliated networks. Respondents were asked to select the five most urgent research priorities among a list of 17 identified by the MNCH WG. Analysis of questionnaire data was undertaken to identify key similarities and differences among respondents according to questionnaire language, location and specialty. Following elimination of the seven lowest ranking priorities, the questionnaire was recirculated to the original pool of respondents. Thematic analysis of final questionnaire data was undertaken by the MNCH WG from which four priority research themes emerged. Results Questionnaire 1 was completed by 225 respondents from 29 countries. Questionnaire 2 was returned by 49 respondents. The four priority research themes were 1) access to healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic, 2) the direct and 3) indirect effects of COVID-19 on pregnant and breastfeeding women and children and 4) the transmission of COVID-19 and protection from infection. Conclusion The results of these questionnaires indicated a high level of concordance among continents and specialties regarding priority research themes. This prioritized list of research uncertainties, developed to specifically highlight the most urgent clinical needs as perceived by healthcare professionals and researchers, could help funding organizations and researchers to answer the most pressing questions for clinicians and public health professionals during the pandemic. It is hoped that these identified priority research themes can help focus the discussion regarding the allocation of limited resources to enhance COVID-19 research in MNCH globally.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.204
GPT teacher head0.496
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicCOVID-19 Impact on ReproductionFrench-language works237,207