Developing a group Model of ANC-PNC through human-centered Design (HCD) to Improve MNCH of first-time Mothers (FTMs) in Bangladesh
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: First-time parenthood is a complex and emotional journey. The gap between demand and quality services for maternal, newborn and child health (MNCH) and family planning (FP) are significant. Lack of time, awareness, and social support are critical challenges of meeting the service requirement for the young and first-time mothers, especially working mothers in urban areas. Objective of the study was to design an intervention model for the young pregnant women and their partners for improving the quality and use of MNCH and FP services and information. Methods: Using a human-centered design (HCD) approach, we conducted 27 in-depth interviews, 10 focus group discussions, and eight mock sessions with first-time mothers, partners, family members, community influencers and service providers in Tongi, Gazipur. During phase 1, we explored the current realities of life and experience of services, both ideal and existing, from perspectives of a diverse set of stakeholders including both health care providers and care seekers. During phase 2, we designed, tested, and iterated the “group model” of antenatal Care through a series of mock sessions, interviews and consultation with service providers and authorities. We recorded, transcribed, and translated the data for collaborative synthesis and analysis process to generate insight and opportunities for optimizing service delivery and uptake. Results: The study findings spoke for the need of providing group sessions for first time parents, social support from peers and family members and capacity development of the service providers. After careful consideration of the stakeholder needs and preferences, the national guidelines and the local implementing partner’s available resources, we arrived at the recommended group model inclusive of five Group Antenatal Care (GANC) and two group Postnatal Care (GPNC) for mothers. All the pregnant women underwent through clinical checkups by medically trained professionals, mainly midwives and doctors. The group model also includes two GANC and one GPNC for fathers, as well as informative sessions for companions. The prototype model included five GANC and two GPNC sessions for mothers, two GANC and one GPNC session for fathers, and informative sessions for companions. The sessions included pregnant women of close gestational age, use of visual aids to support session facilitation, and activities to support group bonding and information retention. Conclusions: The Group Model offering 5 ANC and 2 PNC for women, 2 GANC and 1 GPNC for male partners, and sessions for caregivers was developed in line with the national and WHO recommendation. This model found a feasible approach that involved partners and caregivers in the process and increased MNCH and social support during the voyage of the pregnancy journey. Bangladesh J Obstet Gynaecol, 2022; Vol. 37(1): 14-23
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.023 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".