Understanding Gender-Based Perception During Pregnancy: A Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Gender-based perceptions about maternal health care during pregnancy draw attention to the existence of gender inequity in maternal health care. This study aimed to understand the gender-based perception of gender roles and norms, gender relations, social support, and psychosocial variation in maternal health care during pregnancy. Methods: A qualitative study was conducted in three rural districts of Jimma, Ethiopia. Participants were purposefully chosen from the community groups, including male and female health development armies, religious leaders, health extension workers, midwifery nurses, and primary health care unit directors. The data was gathered through in-depth interviews and focus group discussions. The actual data was collected by men and women qualitative study experts. Atlas ti Ver 9 was used for the analysis. The data was initially coded then changed to a sub-category and at last converted to a category. Results: Four categories emerged: Gender-based roles and norms, psychosocial variation, social support, and gender relations. The informants described men's and women's independent and shared roles improve maternal health care service usage during pregnancy. Once the women became pregnant, men undertook a variety of demanding duties to enhance maternity service consumption. Gender relations and shared decision-making were essential in facilitating maternal healthcare utilization during pregnancy and beyond. Conclusion: This study revealed that maternal health care should not be limited to women alone. Men's and women's prior maternal health experiences, in addition to their knowledge and beliefs, have significantly impacted the utilization of maternal healthcare services during pregnancy. Policymakers and academics should consider men's essential contribution to maternal health care during pregnancy. However, in order to increase their intention to use maternal health care services, it is necessary to clearly identify the interests of women in which men should be involved.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".