MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7105995874 · doi:10.7939/83441

How Does Stigma Associated with Postpartum Urinary Incontinence Affect Health-seeking Behaviours?

2025· dissertation· en· W7105995874 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Alberta Library · 2025
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPelvic floor disorders treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStigma (botany)Affect (linguistics)Qualitative researchUrinary incontinenceSocial stigmaHealth careSocial support

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Postpartum urinary incontinence (PPUI) affects 30–33% of individuals after childbirth, yet health-seeking behaviours remain low despite the availability of prevention and treatment resources. Stigma associated with PPUI may serve as a barrier to seeking resources to manage PPUI such as communication with healthcare providers (HCPs), engaging in physical activity including pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT), and accessing social support. Previous research has not conceptualized the role of stigma in shaping these health behaviours, particularly among racially diverse populations. This study aimed to examine the stigma associated with PPUI and its influence on health-seeking behaviours including interactions with HCPs, physical activity, and social support. A secondary objective was to assess whether further disparities are faced by racialized women experiencing PPUI and associated stigma. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants who self-identified as experiencing PPUI and had delivered a child in Canada within the last two years. Purposeful sampling ensured racial diversity. Using a qualitative descriptive approach, inductive content analysis identified themes related to stigma and health-seeking behaviours. The Health Stigma Discrimination Framework was also used to organize causal factors of PPUI stigma and to help explain stigma responses and their connection to specific behaviours. Findings: Fifteen individuals participated in interviews (nine identifying with racially diverse backgrounds). Six themes were developed: (1) defining PPUI stigma, (2) impact of PPUI stigma on healthcare access, (3) impact of PPUI stigma on physical activity and PFMT, (4) impact of PPUI stigma on social relationships, (5) racial and cultural nuances regarding PPUI stigma, (6) building awareness and support for PPUI to mitigate stigma. Participants described PPUI stigma as embarrassment and self-consciousness about leakage and odour, deterring seeking healthcare, physical activity, and discussing symptoms socially. Barriers to communicating openly with HCPs included shame and appointments being focused on infant health over personal concerns. PPUI stigma also impacted engagement in physical activity, with fears of leakage and odour leading participants to avoid high-impact exercises such as running, opting instead for lower-impact activities like walking. Socially, stigma was reinforced through cultural norms that discourage disclosure and dismissive attitudes, limiting conversations about PPUI with friends, family, and partners. However, some participants found support through peer networks and informal discussions with friends who had similar experiences. Racial differences also played a role in stigma perception, with some participants from racialized backgrounds describing additional barriers to disclosure with HCPs and social networks due to cultural norms emphasizing silence around women’s health issues. Conclusion: Findings from this study illustrate the impact of PPUI stigma on postpartum individuals, affecting their willingness to seek care, engage in physical activity, and receive social support. Interventions aimed at reducing stigma could focus on early education, routine postnatal health screenings that incorporate asking patients about PPUI symptoms, and peer support networks to normalize discussions about PPUI.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.208 · 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
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 venueUniversity of Alberta LibrarySame topicPelvic floor disorders treatmentsFrench-language works237,207