Understanding Information Needs and Barriers to Accessing Health Information Across All Stages of Pregnancy: Systematic Review
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: Understanding consumers' health information needs across all stages of the pregnancy trajectory is crucial to the development of mechanisms that allow them to retrieve high-quality, customized, and layperson-friendly health information. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to identify research gaps in pregnancy-related consumer information needs and available information from different sources. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of CINAHL, Cochrane, PubMed, and Web of Science for relevant articles that were published from 2009 to 2019. The quality of the included articles was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program. A descriptive data analysis was performed on these articles. Based on the review result, we developed the Pregnancy Information Needs Ontology (PINO) and made it publicly available in GitHub and BioPortal. RESULTS: A total of 33 articles from 9 countries met the inclusion criteria for this review, of which the majority were published no earlier than 2016. Most studies were either descriptive (9/33, 27%), interviews (7/33, 21%), or surveys/questionnaires (7/33, 21%); 20 articles mentioned consumers' pregnancy-related information needs. Half (9/18, 50%) of the human-subject studies were conducted in the United States. More than a third (13/33, 39%) of all studies focused on during-pregnancy stage; only one study (1/33, 3%) was about all stages of pregnancy. The most frequent consumer information needs were related to labor delivery (9/20, 45%), medication in pregnancy (6/20, 30%), newborn care (5/20, 25%), and lab tests (6/20, 30%). The most frequently available source of information was the internet (15/24, 63%). PINO consists of 267 classes, 555 axioms, and 271 subclass relationships. CONCLUSIONS: Only a few articles assessed the barriers to access to pregnancy-related information and the quality of each source of information; further work is needed. Future work is also needed to address the gaps between the information needed and the information available.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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