Pica and associated factors among pregnant women attending antenatal clinic at Chelstone Level One Hospital and Mtendere clinic, Lusaka District, Zambia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study assessed the prevalence of pica and associated factors among pregnant women at Chelstone Level-one Hospital and Mtendere clinic, in Lusaka district of Zambia. This was a descriptive cross-sectional study in which questionnaires were administered face to face to 372 pregnant women. The data was analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 23. Statistical significance was set as p=0.05 at 95% confidence interval. The prevalence of pica was 38.2% (n=142), and of these, soil was the most common non-food item consumed (84.5%; n=120). Reasons stated by participants for practicing pica included cravings, sensory reasons such as the pleasant texture, taste, or smell, for controlling nausea and vomiting and others. There was no significant association between nutrition status, hemoglobin level and pica practice. Education level, culture, history of pica, religious affiliation and pica practice among family or friends were associated with the practice of pica (P = <0.050). The practice of pica is noteworthy among pregnant women as it is practiced by a considerable proportion of pregnant women in this area. There is need for increased awareness on pica practice and its harmful effects among pregnant women.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".