MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409494519 · doi:10.1177/17455057251331696

Experiences of Canadian perinatal care during the COVID-19 pandemic: Analysis of open-ended survey responses

2025· article· en· W4409494519 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sigourney Shaw-Churchill, Karen P. Phillips

Bibliographic record

VenueWomen s Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 Impact on Reproduction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth careThematic analysisMedicineContext (archaeology)AutonomyPandemicFamily medicinePrenatal careNursingQualitative researchPopulationCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Environmental healthPolitical scienceDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic caused significant socioeconomic and healthcare disruptions in Canada. COVID-19 healthcare policies and local infection rates varied considerably across Canada's geographically diverse, multijurisdictional healthcare system. Emergence of highly transmissible COVID-19 variants and widespread COVID-19 vaccination mandates in Fall 2021 further impacted life in Canada. The experiences of pregnant people, in particular, were challenged by COVID-19 outbreaks, Canadian hospital policies, and local public health restrictions. OBJECTIVE: This study explored experiences of Canadian perinatal care in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Online, cross-sectional survey with qualitative analysis. METHODS: Individuals pregnant after January 1, 2020 who received perinatal care in Canada participated in our Pandemic Pregnancy Experiences eSurvey, September 1, 2021 to February 1, 2022. Open-ended survey responses were qualitatively evaluated by thematic and content analysis. Codes were identified both deductively and inductively, categorized using principles of woman-centered care, and developed into major and minor themes. RESULTS: Prenatal care and COVID-19 vaccination experiences were evaluated from 362 participants, with 234 participants also elaborating on their labor and delivery (L&D) care. Major themes organized by woman-centered care category as follows: Choice of Healthcare Provider (good quality healthcare provider, barriers to provider of choice), Autonomy-Healthcare (autonomy empowered, autonomy impacted), Choice of Delivery Place (wanted hospital birth, got hospital birth), Choice of Support Companion(s) (no support companion for prenatal appointments, hospital restrictions L&D support companion(s)), and, Autonomy-COVID-19 Vaccination (vaccinated while pregnant/breastfeeding). CONCLUSIONS: Pregnancy and birth experiences were generally positive; however, both COVID-19 and existing constraints of provincial/territorial healthcare systems impacted Canadian perinatal experiences. Limited choice of healthcare provider type and access to prenatal and L&D support companion(s) affected perinatal care satisfaction.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.188
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.096
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWomen s HealthSame topicCOVID-19 Impact on ReproductionFrench-language works237,207