MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226408203 · doi:10.1016/j.lana.2022.100210

Interpersonal challenges in surgical care provision in rural Mexico: A qualitative study

2022· article· en· W4226408203 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Regional Health - Americas · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Health, Geopolitics, Historical Geography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReferralThematic analysisNursingHealth careTeamworkQualitative researchMedicineDehumanizationFeelingPsychologyPolitical scienceSociologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Chiapas is among the states with the lowest access to health care in Mexico. A better understanding of the role of interpersonal relationships in referral systems could improve access to care in the region. The purpose of this study was to analyze the underlying barriers and facilitators to accessing surgical care at public hospitals run by the Ministry of Health in Chiapas. Methods: In this qualitative interview study, we performed semi-structured interviews with 19 surgical patients and 18 healthcare workers at three public hospitals in the Fraylesca Region of Chiapas to explore barriers and facilitators to successfully accessing surgical treatment. Transcripts were coded and analyzed using an inductive, thematic approach to data analysis. Findings: The five major themes identified as barriers to surgical care were dehumanization of patients, the toll of rehumanizing patients, animosity in the system, the refraction of violence onto patients, and poor resource coordination. Three themes identified as facilitators to receiving care were teamwork, social capital, and accompaniment. Interpretation: Health care workers described a culture of demoralization and mistrust within the health system worsened by a scarcity of resources. As a result, patient care is hampered by conflict, miscommunication, and feelings of dehumanization. Efforts to improve access to surgical care in the region should consider strategies to improve teamwork and expand patient accompaniment. Funding: . Antecedentes: Chiapas es uno de los estados en Mexico con el menor acceso a la atención médica, y a los servicios quirúrgicos. Una mejor comprensión del papel de las relaciones interpersonales en los sistemas de referencias podría mejorar el acceso a la atención medica en la región. El objetivo del estudio es analizar las barreras y facilitadores para acceder a la atención quirúrgica en los hospitales públicos pertenecientes a la Secretaria de Salud del estado de Chiapas. Método: En este estudio cualitativo, realizamos entrevistas semiestructuradas con 19 pacientes quirúrgicos y 18 trabajadores de la salud en tres hospitales públicos en la región de la Frailesca de Chiapas para explorar barreras y facilitadores para acceder al tratamiento quirúrgico. Las transcripciones se codificaron y analizaron utilizando un enfoque temático. Resultados: Las cinco barreras principales identificadas fueron la deshumanización de los pacientes, el costo a re humanizar pacientes, la animosidad en el sistema, la refracción de la violencia sobre los pacientes y la mala coordinación de recursos. Tres facilitadores para recibir cirugía fueron el trabajo en equipo, el capital social, y el acompañamiento. Interpretaciones: Los trabajadores de la salud describieron una cultura de desmoralización y desconfianza en el sistema de salud que se agrava con la escasez de recursos. Como resultado se obtiene, conflicto, falta de comunicación, y sentimientos de deshumanización que empeoran la atención al paciente. Recomendaciones para mejorar el acceso a los servicios quirúrgicos en la región incluyen estrategias para mejorar el trabajo en equipo y ampliar el acompañamiento de los pacientes. Financiamiento: La Universidad de Harvard y the Abundance Fund proporcionaron fondos para este proyecto. Las fuentes de financiamiento no influyen en la redacción ni en la publicación del manuscrito.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.193
Threshold uncertainty score0.923

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.305 · 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