Baby Buddy App for Breastfeeding and Behavior Change: Retrospective Study of the App Using the Behavior Change Wheel
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Breastfeeding plays a major role in the health of mothers and babies and has the potential to positively shape an individual's life both in the short and long term. In the United Kingdom (UK), although 81% of women initiate breastfeeding, only 1% of women breastfeed exclusively to 6 months as recommended by the World Health Organization. In the UK, women who are socially disadvantaged and younger are less likely to breastfeed at 6 to 8 weeks postpartum. One strategy that aims to improve these statistics is the Baby Buddy app, which has been designed and implemented by the UK charity Best Beginnings to be a universal intervention to help reduce health inequalities, including those in breastfeeding. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to retrospectively examine the development of Baby Buddy by applying the Behavior Change Wheel (BCW) framework to understand how it might increase breastfeeding self-efficacy, knowledge, and confidence. METHODS: Retrospective application of the BCW was completed after the app was developed and embedded into maternity services. A three-stage process evaluation used triangulation methods and formalized tools to gain an understanding of the potential mechanisms and behaviors used in apps that are needed to improve breastfeeding rates in the UK. First, we generated a behavioral analysis by mapping breastfeeding barriers and enablers onto the Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation-Behavior (COM-B) system using documents provided by Best Beginnings. Second, we identified the intervention functions and policy categories used. Third, we linked these with the behavior change techniques identified in the app breastfeeding content using the Behavior Change Techniques Taxonomy (BCTTv1). RESULTS: Baby Buddy is a well-designed platform that could be used to change breastfeeding behaviors. Findings from stage one showed that Best Beginnings had defined breastfeeding as a key behavior requiring support and demonstrated a thorough understanding of the context in which breastfeeding occurs, the barriers and enablers of breastfeeding, and the target actions needed to support breastfeeding. In stage two, Best Beginnings had used intervention and policy functions to address the barriers and enablers of breastfeeding. In stage three, Baby Buddy had been assessed for acceptability, practicability, effectiveness, affordability, safety, and equity. Several behavior change techniques that could assist women with decision making around breastfeeding (eg, information about health consequences and credible sources) and possibly affect attitudes and self-efficacy were identified. Of the 39 videos in the app, 19 (49%) addressed physical capabilities related to breastfeeding and demonstrated positive breastfeeding behaviors. CONCLUSIONS: Applying a theoretical framework retrospectively to a mobile app is possible and results in useful information to understand potential health benefits and to inform future development. Future research should assess which components and behavioral techniques in the app are most effective in changing behavior and supporting breastfeeding.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».