MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4402071213 · doi:10.2196/58410

Centering Birthing Experiences of Women of Color: Protocol for a Qualitative Maternal Near Miss Study

2024· article· en· W4402071213 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kaitlyn Hernandez-Spalding, Oluyemi Farinu, Lasha Clarke, Tamiah Lewis, Adrian A. Suarez, Kimarie Bugg, Kieauna Strickland, Ashley Molleti, Sherry Maxy, Natalie Hernandez

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and fetal healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintQualitative researchProtocol (science)Women of colorPsychologyMedicineMedical educationComputer scienceAlternative medicineWorld Wide WebGender studiesSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In the United States, Black women are 3-4 times more likely to experience maternal near miss (MNM) or severe maternal morbidity (SMM) than non-Hispanic White women. However, there is a limited narrative-based investigation into Black and other marginalized women's MNM experiences. Additionally, limited extant research on the impact of MNM and SMM on birthing women's families or support persons and health care providers precludes the development of multilevel, patient-centered methods to eliminate these racial or ethnic disparities. OBJECTIVE: This paper presents the protocol for a study that aims to draw insights from the experiences of racially and socioeconomically diverse mothers with MNM and SMM, their family or support persons (eg, partners), and health care providers to inform legislation, clinical practice, and infrastructure for optimal social support using PRISMA-P (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols) guidelines. Using a storytelling approach to assess participants' risk factors, document underlying causes, and research clinical causes of MNM, researchers hypothesize these data will inform policies to improve maternal conditions and provide safe and effective prevention and treatment options for birthing persons. METHODS: Morehouse School of Medicine (MSM) will partner with health services and community-based organizations to promote inclusive participant recruitment for this multiphase study. In phase 1, qualitative interviews were conducted with birthing women (n≤87) who have experienced MNM and SMM. In phase 2, we will conduct qualitative interviews with the following groups: birthing women's partners or support persons (n≤50), health care providers serving birthing women (n≤50), and adults who lost their mothers to pregnancy-related complications (n≤50). In each phase, the total number of participants interviewed will be based on theoretical saturation, that is, the point in iterative data collection and analysis when all important insights have been exhausted from the data already available. RESULTS: Recruitment for phase 1 started in July 2021. As of March 2024, we have recruited 87 racially and socioeconomically diverse birthing women. Of those, 74% (64/87) self-identified as Black or African American, 20% (17/87) as Hispanic or Latina, and 9% (8/87) as Native American or Alaska Native. Severe preeclampsia accounted for 46% (40/87) of participants' pregnancy-related adverse experiences. Qualitative interviews grounded in narrative-based medicine are ongoing. Recruitment for phase 2 will occur between July 2023 and December 2024. Study results will be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this research will deepen the understanding of how severe obstetric complications (1) are experienced by birthing women; (2) are perceived by their partners, support persons, and health providers; and (3) impact the lives of bereaved family and community members.

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)0.072
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.051
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.381

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0720.051
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0090.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0050.006
Research integrity0.0050.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0560.009

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 head0.491
GPT teacher head0.685
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicMaternal and fetal healthcare→French-language works237,207→