MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220686079 · doi:10.1111/jmwh.13338

Rural Residents’ Perinatal Experiences During the Initial Months of the COVID‐19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study in British Columbia

2022· article· en· W4220686079 on OpenAlexaffabout
Eva Sullivan, Audrey Cameron, Jude Kornelsen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Midwifery & Women s Health · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicThematic analysisFocus groupQualitative researchRural areaPsychological resilienceMedicineAnxietyReferralHealth carePsychologyNursingCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Economic growthDiseasePsychiatrySociologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Many studies have explored the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on perinatal health, but few have examined the effects of the pandemic on birthing families through a rural lens. Given that the COVID-19 pandemic has reinforced long-standing disparities between urban and rural communities, it is important that the significance of place on the health and wellness of rural populations is made visible. METHODS: In-depth interviews and focus groups with 16 participants from rural communities in British Columbia, Canada, were performed. Participants included those who had been pregnant or given birth after March 11, 2020. Data from the interviews and focus groups were analyzed using the principles of thematic analysis to understand the perinatal experiences of rural families during the initial months of the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: Analysis of the data revealed 4 major themes: perceived risk of infection, navigating uncertainty, experience of care received, and resilience and silver linings. In general, participants conceptualized rural communities as safer bubbles. Exceptions included specific vectors of risk such as tourism travel and border communities. Challenges experienced by rural families including anxiety around changing health guidelines, reduced social support, and potential loss of their partners' support at births. Additional concerns specific to rural experiences added to this burden, including fear of traveling to referral centers for care and increased difficulties accessing resources. DISCUSSION: Participants reported positive, compassionate care experiences that helped to mitigate some of the added stressors of the pandemic. These findings highlight the importance of perinatal care provision that integrates physiologic and mental health supports. This study provides a foundation for a comprehensive inquiry into the experiences of rural perinatal services during COVID-19.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.197
Threshold uncertainty score0.397

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0160.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.342 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations14
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Midwifery & Women s HealthSame topicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumFrench-language works237,207