MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4255293690 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-43681/v4

Birth preparedness and complication readiness among women of reproductive age in Kenya and Tanzania: a community-based cross-sectional survey

2020· preprint· en· W4255293690 on OpenAlexfundno aff
James Orwa, Samwel Maina Gatimu, Michaela Mantel, Stanley Lüchters, Micheal Mugerwa, Sharon Brownie, Leonard Subi, Secilia Mrema, Lucy Nyaga, Grace Edwards, Loveluck Mwasha, Kahabi Isangula, Edna Selestine, Sofia Jadavji, Rachel Pell, Columba Mbekenga, Marleen Temmerman

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGovernment of CanadaGovernment of the Republic of KenyaAga Khan Foundation CanadaAga Khan Foundation
KeywordsTanzaniaCross-sectional studyPreparednessMedicineDemographyObstetricsSocioeconomicsPolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Delayed health-seeking continues to contribute to preventable maternal and neonatal deaths in low resource countries. Some of the strategies to avoid the delay include early preparation for the birth and detection of danger signs. We aimed to assess the level of practice and factors associated with birth preparedness and complication readiness (BPCR) in Kenya and Tanzania. Methods: We conducted community-based multi-stage cross-sectional surveys in Kilifi and Kisii counties in Kenya and Mwanza region in Tanzania and included women who delivered two years preceding the survey (2016–2017). A woman who mentioned at least three out of five BPCR components was considered well-prepared. Bivariate and multivariable proportional odds model were used to determine the factors associated with the BPCR. The STROBE guidelines for cross-sectional studies informed the design and reporting of this study. Results: Only 11.4% (59/519) and 7.6% (31/409) of women were well-prepared for birth and its complications in Kenya and Tanzania, respectively, while 39.7% and 30.6% were unprepared, respectively. Level of education (primary: adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.59, 95% CI: 1.14–2.20, secondary: aOR: 2.24, 95% CI: 1.39–3.59), delivery within health facility (aOR: 1.63, 95% CI: 1.15–2.29), good knowledge of danger signs during pregnancy (aOR: 1.28, 95% CI: 0.80–2.04), labour and childbirth (aOR: 1.57, 95% CI: 0.93–2.67), postpartum (aOR: 2.69, 95% CI: 1.24–5.79), and antenatal care were associated with BPCR (aOR: 1.42, 95% CI: 1.13–1.78). Conclusion: Overall, most pregnant women were not prepared for birth and its complications in Kilifi, Kisii and Mwanza region. Improving level of education, creating awareness on danger signs during preconception, pregnancy, childbirth, and postpartum period, and encouraging antenatal care and skilled birth care among women and their male partners/families are recommended strategies to promote BPCR practices and contribute to improved pregnancy outcomes in women and newborns.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicGlobal Maternal and Child HealthFrench-language works237,207