MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6887715700 · doi:10.17605/osf.io/caqg7

A Prospective Mixed-Methods-REsearch Project on Subjective Birth Experience and PErson-Centred Care in ParenTs and Obstetric Health Care Staff (RESPECT)

2024· other· en· W6887715700 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Science Framework · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChildbirthQuarter (Canadian coin)Health carePregnancyProspective cohort studyPublic healthSocioeconomic statusHome birthPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

According to the Federal Statistical Office of Germany, more than 2,000 children are born every day in Germany, making the quality of maternity care a crucial public health issue. Although the majority of parents experience childbirth positively, international studies report that up to 34% of mothers and about a quarter of partners have negative and sometimes even traumatic experiences. In addition to various (mental) health and socioeconomic factors, the interaction between the woman giving birth, the person accompanying her, and the obstetric health care staff also plays an important role. The aim of the interdisciplinary project RESPECT ("A Prospective Mixed-Methods-REsearch Project on Subjective Birth Experience and PErson-centred Care in ParenTs and Obstetric Health Care Staff") is a targeted investigation of the subjective birth experience of (expectant) parents as well as associated factors before, during, and after birth, especially in relation to the role of obstetric health care staff. Launched in 2022, RESPECTparents is a prospective cohort study targeting (expectant) mothers and partners who are surveyed from late pregnancy (T1: late pregnancy) to six months postpartum (T2: 8 weeks postpartum; T3: 6 months postpartum), with an additional assessment point planned at 2 years postpartum, depending on subsequent funding (T4: 24 months postpartum). Expectant parents are recruited mainly in three maternity hospitals and one freestanding birth center in Dresden. They are surveyed three times using online questionnaires (T1, T3, and presumably T4) and once by a structured telephone interview (T2). In addition, as part of the sub-study RESPECTparents-talk, some parents are questioned about the role of the obstetric health care staff on their birth experience in a semi-structured, guideline-based qualitative interview. Similarly, obstetric health care staff is interviewed once in a semi-structured, guideline-based qualitative expert interview regarding their own role on the parental birth experience and their knowledge and attitudes regarding person-centered care in obstetrics (sub-study RESPECTstaff). Thus, the data collected in the project will help to provide important insights into the factors influencing the subjective experience of childbirth in Germany and, consequently, provide starting points for measures to improve childbirth care and women’s and family health. The project is funded by the German Federal Ministry of Health (BMG) and supported by an Advisory Board including national and international experts in the field of perinatal health care or research.

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)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.808
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.017
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.387 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Science FrameworkFrench-language works237,207