MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4327811704 · doi:10.1111/jan.15642

Unmet needs, limited access: A qualitative study of postpartum health care experiences of people with disabilities

2023· article· en· W4327811704 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Nursing · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Rights and Representation
Canadian institutionsCanadian Arthritis Patient AllianceThe Scarborough HospitalPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsQualitative researchNursingMedicineHealth carePostpartum periodPsychologyFamily medicinePregnancySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To understand the postpartum care received by birthing people with disabilities and their newborns, from their own perspectives. DESIGN: A qualitative study with semi-structured interviews. METHODS: Between July 2019 and February 2020, in-person and virtual interviews were conducted with 31 people with physical, sensory, and intellectual/developmental disabilities in Ontario, Canada, about the formal inpatient and outpatient services and supports they used in the first few months after they gave birth. Thematic analysis was used identify common themes. RESULTS: We identified three overall themes concerning participants' postpartum care experiences and the different types of formal services received in and out of hospital: (1) lack of adequate care, (2) lack of provider awareness of disability and disability accommodations, and (3) fear of judgement, discrimination, and intrusive surveillance. The identified themes were applicable across disability groups. However, most comments on disability accommodations came from participants with physical or sensory disabilities, while participants with intellectual/developmental disabilities most commonly reported concerns about lack of adequate care and fear of judgement, discrimination, and intrusive surveillance. CONCLUSION: Findings indicate that postpartum care often fails people with disabilities. This could contribute to negative health consequences for them and their newborns. IMPACT: Birthing people with disabilities need multidisciplinary, proactive, and strengths-based postpartum care to mitigate risk for health complications. Further, disability-related training and guidelines for health and social service providers is required. REPORTING METHOD: Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ). PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Our research team included two peer researchers with physical disabilities who served as co-interviewers and participated in data analysis, contributing their lived experience of disability and interactions with the health care system. All stages of the study were also informed by feedback from the study's Advisory Committee, which comprised women with disabilities (many of whom are parents), disability organization staff, clinicians, and policy representatives.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.256

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.404 · 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