MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4220916467 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1337284/v1

The interprofessional and interorganizational collaboration in perinatal care settings after issuing the Quebec Perinatal Policy 2008-2018: A single case study

2022· preprint· en· W4220916467 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Roksana Behruzi, Stephanie Klam, Vania Jimenez, Hatem M Hatem, Charo Rodríguez

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, Medicine and Society
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill University
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsNursingThematic analysisMultidisciplinary approachScarcityLanguage barrierMedicineQualitative researchPsychologyPolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: The main objective of this study was to explore how the Quebec Perinatal Policy influenced the collaborative experiences of maternity care providers in a birthing center and its affiliated hospital. Methods: A single case study was used. Data collection included semi-structural interviews with multidisciplinary professional and administrator participants; direct observation and field notes; documents and archives. A qualitative thematic method and QDA Miner software were used for analysis. Results: Our investigation reveals that midwives have complete access to the hospital with which a formal agreement was signed. The completion of the Quebec Perinatal Policy is still under question because of the lack of human and financial resources. Some of the barriers to fully execution of the Perinatal Policy in the province of Quebec include the absence of strategies or willingness to open more birthing centers, the scarcity of training sites for midwives, and the limited number of schools that provide midwifery education in Quebec. There was no obvious effect of Quebec Perinatal Policy on the collaborative professional activities among midwives in the birthing center and other professionals in the affiliated hospital. Tension among maternity care professionals was fuelled by prejudice, a poor understanding of the roles and lack of trust of other professionals, poor communication, and an unwillingness to collaborate. Factors that facilitated collaboration between maternity care professionals were close communication and exchange of information between personnel, participation in multidisciplinary workshops and meetings, and proper preparation of midwifery clients for possible transfer of care. Conclusion: Collaboration is necessary among maternity care professionals in order to better implement the perinatal care policies in Quebec. Additional strategies include clearly defining the roles and responsibilities of the various maternity care providers, designing interdisciplinary programs and workshops to strengthen teamwork and to improve understanding of the scope of practice of other maternity care professionals, in order to encourage mutual respect and collaboration.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.367
Threshold uncertainty score0.737

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0180.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.497
Teacher spread0.437 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicHealth, Medicine and Society→French-language works237,207→