“Broken”—How Identities as Women, Mothers and Partners Are Intertwined with the Experience of Living with and Seeking Treatment for Pelvic Organ Prolapse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pelvic Organ Prolapse (POP) occurs when one or more pelvic organs descend into or through the vaginal opening, significantly impacting physical and mental health. POP affects the female reproductive tract and, overwhelmingly, people who identify as women. However, little research has examined the impact of gendered expectations on women's treatment-seeking for POP and their decision-making around surgery for POP. To address this gap, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 26 women seeking surgery for POP in Alberta, Canada. Data were analyzed from a gender-based lens, using the Framework Method. Participants reported the need to balance their identities as women, partners, and mothers in their pursuit of treatment and faced many barriers to treatment related to their gendered responsibilities. Findings highlight the gendered experiences of prolapse in the context of healthcare needs and can inform policies and practices which promote more equitable access to prolapse treatment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".