MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4386737565 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0288089

Mobile phones and infant health at birth

2023· article· en· W4386737565 on OpenAlexafffund
Luca Maria Pesando, Komin Qiyomiddin

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersWeatherhead Center for International Affairs, Harvard UniversitySocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaJacobs FoundationYork UniversityNew York University Abu DhabiHarvard University
KeywordsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is increasing evidence that digital technologies such as mobile phones have the potential to shape some of the United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) such as health, education, and nutrition, even among the most resource-deprived countries and communities in the world. Nonetheless, little research has focused on the intergenerational implications of digital technologies for infant health and wellbeing. This study leverages Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) data from 29 low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to explore associations between mothers' ownership of mobile phones and their children's health at birth, as measured by birth weight and low birth weight (LBW), i.e., weight lower than 2,500 grams. Infants born to women owning mobile phones fare consistently better in terms of birth weight, even after accounting for potential socioeconomic confounders and other sources of media or information in the household. Partly, mechanisms are consistent with the idea of broader knowledge and access to healthcare services, as associations are mediated by a higher number of antenatal visits, higher likelihood of having a birth assisted by a health professional, and by the extent to which mothers hear about family planning by text message. Associations are strongest among low-educated mothers. Also, associations are stronger in countries where infant health is poorer yet mobile-phone diffusion is higher, highlighting the comparatively higher potential of the diffusion of mobile phones for global development in poorest contexts. Our findings may be of interest to scholars and policymakers concerned with identifying relatively cheap policy levers to promote global health and wellbeing in disadvantaged contexts, particularly among women.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicMobile Health and mHealth Applications→French-language works237,207→