MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979638094 · doi:10.1186/1471-2458-13-645

A qualitative study exploring factors associated with mothers’ decisions to formula-feed their infants in Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada

2013· article· en· W1979638094 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Kimberly Bonia, Laurie Twells, Beth Halfyard, Valerie Ludlow, Leigh Anne Newhook, Janet Murphy-Goodridge

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Public Health · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsJaneway Children's Health and Rehabilitation CentreMemorial University of NewfoundlandNewfoundland and Labrador Centre for Applied Health Research
FundersNewfoundland and Labrador Centre for Applied Health Research
KeywordsBreastfeedingEmbarrassmentMedicineFormula feedingBiostatisticsPublic healthInfant formulaThematic analysisPsychological interventionQualitative researchFocus groupBreast feedingPopulationFeelingEnvironmental healthDevelopmental psychologyFamily medicinePediatricsNursingPsychologySocial psychologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Breastfeeding has numerous health benefits. In 2010, the province of Newfoundland and Labrador had the lowest breastfeeding initiation rate (64.0%) in Canada. Formula feeding is associated with well-known health risks. Exclusive formula feeding is the "cultural norm" in some regions of the province. Women appear resistant to changing their infant feeding behaviors and remain committed to their decision to formula-feed. The primary aim of this qualitative study was to examine individual factors that shaped mothers' decisions to formula-feed their infants. Nineteen mothers who were currently formula feeding their children participated in the study. METHODS: Qualitative research in the form of focus groups was conducted in three communities in the province in 2010. A thematic content analysis identified the main themes that influenced mothers' decisions to formula-feed their infants. RESULTS: The main themes included issues concerning the support needed to breastfeed, the convenience associated with formula feeding, and the embarrassment surrounding breastfeeding in public. CONCLUSIONS: These findings help to better understand why mothers choose formula feeding over breastfeeding and may help to inform the development of public health interventions targeted at this population of mothers.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.455

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.193
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.186 · 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.

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

Citations49
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Public HealthSame topicBreastfeeding Practices and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207