MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4386751308 · doi:10.2196/49578

Facility-Based Audit System With Integrated Community Engagement to Improve Maternal and Perinatal Health Outcomes in Rural Pakistan: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Implementation Study

2023· article· en· W4386751308 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zahid Memon, Wardah Ahmed, Shah Muhammad, Sajid Soofi, Shanti Chohan, Arjumand Rizvi, Paul Barach, Zulfiqar A Bhutta

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsAuditMedicineHealth facilityGovernment (linguistics)Public healthHealth careCommunity healthEnvironmental healthNursingBusinessPopulationPolitical scienceAccounting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Maternal and newborn mortality in Pakistan remains as a major public health challenge. Pakistan faces significant infrastructure challenges and inadequate access to quality health care, exacerbated by sociocultural factors. Facility-based audit systems coupled with community engagement are key elements in achieving improved health system performance. We describe an implementation approach adapted from the World Health Organization audit cycle in real-world settings, with a plan to scale-up through mixed methods evaluation plan. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to implement a locally acceptable and relevant audit system and evaluate its feasibility within the rural health system of Pakistan for scale-up. METHODS: The implementation of the audit system comprises six phases: (1) identify facility and community leadership through consultative meetings with government district health offices, (2) establish the audit committee under the supervision of district health officer, (3) initiate audit with ongoing community engagement, (4) train the audit committee members, (5) launch the World Health Organization audit cycle (monthly meetings), and (6) quarterly review and refresher training. Data from all deliveries, live births, maternal deaths, maternal near misses, stillbirths, and neonatal deaths will be identified and recorded from four sources: (1) secondary-level care rural health facilities, (2) lady health workers' registers, (3) community representatives, and (4) project routine survey team. Concurrent quantitative and qualitative data will be drawn from case assessments, process analysis, and recommendations as components of iterative improvement cycles during the project. Outcomes will be the geographic distribution of mortality to measure the reach, proportion of facilities initiated to implement an audit system for measuring the adoption, proportion of audit committees with community representation, and proportion of audit committee members' sharing feedback regularly to measure acceptability and feasibility. In addition, outcomes of effectiveness will be measured based on data recording and reporting trends, identified modifiable factors for mortality and morbidity as underpinned by the Three Delays framework. Qualitative data will be analyzed based on perceived facilitators, barriers, and lessons learned for policy implications. Results will be summarized in frequencies and percentages and triangulated by the project team. Data will be analyzed using Stata (version 16; StataCorp) and NVivo (Lumivero) software. RESULTS: The study will be implemented for 20 months, followed by an additional 4-month period for follow-up. Initial results will be presented to the district health office and the District Health Program Management Team Meeting in the districts. CONCLUSIONS: This study will generate evidence about the feasibility and potential scale-up of a facility-based mortality audit system with integrated community engagement in rural Pakistan. Audit committees will complete the feedback loop linking health care providers, community representatives, and district health officials (policy makers). This implementation approach will serve decision makers in improving maternal and perinatal health outcomes. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/49578.

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)0.096
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.053
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.508

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0960.053
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0400.006

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 head0.278
GPT teacher head0.634
Teacher spread0.356 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicGlobal Maternal and Child Health→French-language works237,207→