Factors that influence the uptake of postnatal care among adolescent girls: a qualitative evidence synthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Adolescent pregnancy is associated with increased risk of maternal and child morbidity and mortality globally. Access to safe, appropriate and affordable antenatal, childbirth and postnatal care (PNC) is essential in mitigating this risk. PNC is an often undervalued, underused, and understudied component of the continuum of maternal health services; however, it provides an important opportunity for adolescent girls to have access to health information and resources as they navigate the transition to motherhood and/or recovery from childbirth. This qualitative evidence synthesis seeks to highlight the experiences and perspectives of adolescent girls and their partners in accessing and using routine PNC. METHODS: Papers were selected from a primary review on PNC where a global search of databases was conducted to identify studies with qualitative data focused on PNC utilisation. Within this primary review, a subset of studies focused on adolescents was tagged for subanalysis. A data extraction form drawing on an a priori framework was used to extract data from each study. Review findings were grouped across studies and mapped onto relevant themes, which were then adapted, as appropriate, to best reflect emergent themes from included studies. RESULTS: Of 662 papers identified for full text review, 15 were included in this review on adolescents' experiences. Fourteen review findings were mapped onto four themes including: resources and access, social norms, experiences of care, and tailored support needs. CONCLUSION: Improving uptake of PNC by adolescent girls requires multipronged approaches in improving availability of and access to adolescent-sensitive maternal health services and reducing feelings of shame and stigma in the postpartum period. Much should be done to address structural barriers to access, but tangible steps to improving the quality and responsiveness of available services can be taken immediately. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019139183.
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 | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".