A qualitative enquiry of health care workers’ narratives on knowledge and sources of information on principles of Respectful Maternity Care (RMC)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research from sub-Saharan Africa indicate that many women experience varied forms of disrespectful maternity care, which amount to a violation of their rights and dignity. Notably, there is little research that sheds light on health care workers (HCWs) training and knowledge of principles of respectful maternity care (RMC). Formulating appropriate interventional strategies to promote the respectful provision of services for women during pregnancy, childbirth, and postpartum period requires an understanding of the current state of knowledge and sources of information on respectful maternity care among HCWs. This paper reports findings from a qualitative study that examined the knowledge and sources of information on the Respectful Maternity Care Charter among HCWs in rural Kisii and Kilifi counties in Kenya. Between January and March 2020, we conducted 24 in-depth interviews among HCWs in rural Kisii and Kilifi health facilities. Data were analyzed using a mixed deductive and inductive thematic analysis guided by Braun's [2006] six stages of analysis. We found that from the seven globally accepted principles of respectful maternity care, at least half of the HCWs were aware of patients right to consented care, confidentiality and privacy, and the right to non-discriminatory care based on specific attributes. Knowledge of the right to no physical and emotional abuse, abandonment of care, and detentions in the facilities was limited to a minority of health care workers but only after prompting. Sources of information on respectful maternity care were largely limited to continuous medical and professional training and clinical mentorship. The existing gap shows the need for training and mentorship of HCWs on the Respectful Maternity Care Charter as part of pre-service medical and nursing curricula and continuing clinical education to bridge this gap. At the policy level, strategies are necessary to support the integration of respectful maternity care into pre-service training curricula.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".