MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4321116352 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-060337

Opti’care protocol: a randomised control trial to evaluate the impact of a mobile antenatal care clinic in isolated rural areas on prenatal follow-up

2023· article· en· W4321116352 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Guillaume Legrand, Julie Duclos-Médard, Juliette Thomazet, Marine Pranal, Eric Langlois, Charline Mourgues, Françoise Vendittelli

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Health, British Columbia
KeywordsMedicinePrenatal careExact testPopulationResidenceIntervention (counseling)Cluster randomised controlled trialMultivariate analysisFamily medicineCluster (spacecraft)Randomized controlled trialPregnancyPediatricsEnvironmental healthDemographyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Rural residence appears to be a factor of vulnerability among pregnant women with poor clinical antenatal care. Our principal objective is to assess the impact of an infrastructure for a mobile antenatal care clinic on the completion of antenatal care for women identified as geographically vulnerable in a perinatal network. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Controlled cluster-randomised study in two parallel arms comparing an intervention group with an open-label control group. This study will concern the population of pregnant women who must live in one of the municipalities covered by the perinatal network and considered to be an area of geographic vulnerability. The cluster randomisation will take place according to the municipality of residence. The intervention will be the implementation of pregnancy monitoring by a mobile antenatal care clinic. The completion of antenatal care between the intervention and control groups will be a binary criterion: 1 will be attributed to each antenatal care that includes all visits and supplementary examinations. Sample size has been estimated to be 330 at least with an 80% participation rate.The univariate analyses will compare the follow-up rates (with Fisher's exact test), and all individual characteristics collected (Fisher's exact test, Student's t-test) between the two groups. The multivariate analysis will use a mixed linear model analysis and consider the cluster effect as random; the initial model will include known confounders from the literature, confounders identified in univariate analyses, and the clinically relevant prognostic factors. All of these factors will be taken into account in the model as a fixed effect. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Patient Protection Committee North-West II approved this study on 4 February 2021 (IRB 2020-A02247-32). The results will be the subject of scientific communications and publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04823104.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0060.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.004

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.514
Teacher spread0.428 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation→French-language works237,207→