Determinants associated with high-risk fertility behaviours among reproductive aged women in Bangladesh: a cross-sectional study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We aimed to determine the factors that increase the risk of HRFB in Bangladeshi women of reproductive age 15-49 years. METHODS: The study utilised the latest Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey (BDHS) 2017-18 dataset. The Pearson's chi-square test was performed to determine the relationships between the outcome and the independent variables, while multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify the potential determinants associated with HRFB. RESULTS: Overall 67.7% women had HRFB among them 45.6% were at single risk and 22.1% were at multiple high-risks. Women's age (35-49 years: AOR = 6.42 95% CI 3.95-10.42), who were Muslims(AOR = 5.52, 95% CI 2.25-13.52), having normal childbirth (AOR = 1.47, 95% CI 1.22-1.69), having unwanted pregnancy (AOR = 10.79, 95% CI 5.67-18.64) and not using any contraceptive methods (AOR = 1.37, 95% CI 1.24-1.81) were significantly associated with increasing risk of having HRFB. Alternatively, women and their partners' higher education were associated with reducing HRFB. CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of Bangladeshi women had high-risk fertility behaviour which is quite alarming. Therefore, the public health policy makers in Bangladesh should emphasis on this issue and design appropriate interventions to reduce the maternal HRFB.
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.
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 | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it