MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413998271 · doi:10.3389/fgwh.2025.1569410

Preconception care practice among pregnant women attending antenatal care at Wachemo University, Nigist Eleni Mohammed Memorial Comprehensive Specialized Hospital, southern Ethiopia, 2022: a mixed-methods study

2025· article· en· W4413998271 on OpenAlexaff
Tadesse Getu, Melesech Eliso, Tesema Beraku, Temesgen Getaneh, Engdaw Asmare Anlay, Samuel Yohannes, Pammla Petrucka, Ayenew Tega

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Global Women s Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Contraception
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersWachemo University
KeywordsMedicineMaternity careNursingObstetricsFamily medicinePolitical scienceHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Preconception care includes biomedical, behavioral, and social health interventions for women and couples before conception, aiming to improve their overall health status. Despite its importance, studies conducted in Ethiopia reveal that the practice remains unacceptably low; this emphasizes the need for further investigation, particularly through mixed-methods studies incorporating women's perspectives. Methods An institution-based, cross-sectional study with concurrent triangulation was conducted at Wachemo University, Nigist Eleni Mohammed Memorial Comprehensive Specialized Hospital between 1 April and 30 June 2022. Quantitative data were collected using a systematic random sampling method, while qualitative data were obtained through purposive sampling. A structured, interviewer-administered questionnaire was used to collect data from 332 eligible antenatal care clients. The data were entered into EpiData and analyzed using SPSS. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify factors associated with the practice of preconception care. A 95% confidence interval (CI) and p-values <0.05 were considered statistically significant. Thematic analysis of qualitative data was performed using ATLAS.ti version 7. Results This study showed that 104 women (31.3%) (95% CI: 26.5–36.5) engaged in good preconception care practices. Factors significantly associated with good practices included attending college or university [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 3.52, 95% CI: 1.14–10.87], having a history of adverse pregnancy outcomes (AOR = 4.82, 95% CI: 2.20–10.58), receiving support from one’s husband (AOR = 2.45, 95% CI: 1.05–5.73), and having good knowledge of preconception care (AOR = 4.52, 95% CI: 2.11–9.68). The qualitative analysis revealed that client-related and health facility-related factors influenced the practice of preconception care. Conclusion Nearly 7 out of 10 women in this study became pregnant without the utilization of any component of preconception care. To improve the practice of preconception care, it is essential to raise awareness about its benefits among all women of reproductive age. Future efforts focusing on knowledge dissemination and awareness creation to improve partner support are crucial to enhancing preconception care practices.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Global Women s HealthSame topicReproductive Health and ContraceptionFrench-language works237,207