Breastfeeding Practices among the Old Order Mennonites in Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Old Order Mennonites (OOM) of rural Ontario have a lifestyle that is very distinct from the rest of Canada. Breastfeeding practices among this community have not been described previously. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) at 2, 4, and 6 months; to compare the prevalence of EBF among OOM and Canadian women; to investigate factors associated with EBF at 6 months; and to gain qualitative insight into the breastfeeding practices of OOM women. METHODS: Data on maternal characteristics, delivery factors, and infant feeding methods at birth and at 2, 4, and 6 months were obtained from medical records at the Elmira Medical Centre for all births to OOM women between January 2006 and December 2011. Semi-structured interviews were carried out with 2 lactation consultants working at the Elmira Medical Centre. RESULTS: Complete breastfeeding data were available for 195 of 225 OOM women (77.4%). The majority of OOM women initiated breastfeeding (87.9%); 81.4% continued to breastfeed exclusively at 2 months, 74.0% to 4 months, and 36.8% to 6 months. Women who had a homebirth (12.3%) had 2.6-fold higher odds of EBF at 6 months (odds ratio, 2.59; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-6.53) compared with women who delivered in a hospital. Cultural and religious influences and community support were suggested as reasons for the relatively high prevalence of EBF. CONCLUSION: Breastfeeding rates among OOM women are consistently higher in the first 6 months of life compared to the general Canadian population. Homebirth independently predicted increased odds of EBF at 6 months.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".