143 Rh-Disease Awareness and Prevention (RhAP): Knowledge Assessment of Obstetrical Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Primary Subject area Maternal-Fetal Medicine Background Rhesus hemolytic disease of the newborn (RhD) was once the most common and severe form of hemolytic disease of the newborn with outcomes including anemia, jaundice, stillbirth and death. Approximately 15% of Canadian women are Rh-negative, yet RhD is relatively unknown due to prevention by Rh immunoglobulin (RhIG). There is a need to advocate for the ongoing prevention of RhD in high-income countries (HICs) due to low incidence, vaccine hesitancy and misinformation, and in low-income countries (LICs) where lack of access to RhIG contributes to over 350,000 annual cases worldwide. Objectives Our present aim is to assess the current state of knowledge of RhD among women in our centre. Design/Methods Questionnaires were administered to a consecutive sample of pregnant women of all blood types (5-42 weeks gestation) attending an urban Obstetrics Clinic between January - March 2020, and included demographics and self-reporting of current RhD awareness. Results Of the 586 participants surveyed, 43% did not know their blood type and 16% identified as Rh-negative (Table 1). Sixty-one percent of participants recalled receiving information about their blood type, and only 31% knew their partner’s blood type. Only 45% of the Rh-negative subset (Table 2) in their third trimester (or postpartum) knew that they had been given RhIG (routinely offered at 28 weeks gestation). While 84% of Rh-negative women had received information about RhD from various sources (physician, online, etc.), there was a lack of depth in their knowledge with two-thirds having no knowledge of the common sequelae of RhD. The majority of Rh-negative participants expressed interest in contributing to local efforts (58/92), including interest in our advocacy group. Conclusion As expected, many participants did not know their Rh status, despite routine testing in pregnancy. Many were unaware of the potential sequelae associated with RhD and rationale for its prevention, even in the Rh-negative subgroup. Not all Rh-negative women were aware of having received RhIG, presumably having received it without knowledge or understanding. We are concerned that lack of awareness, especially among Rh-negative women in HICs may lead to increased complacency, RhIG refusal, and missed opportunities for patient self-advocacy. Our questionnaire results provide further impetus to advocate for increased RhD education for the patients and their care providers. Next steps include the creation of a patient-led focus group that aims to improve local and global awareness of RhD to help decrease the burden of this potentially devastating and preventable disorder.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".