MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Breastfeeding Peer Support: Maternal and Volunteer Perceptions from a Randomized Controlled Trial

2002· article· en· W2008962624 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBirth · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreastfeedingPeer supportRandomized controlled trialIntervention (counseling)Social supportPeer groupPsychological interventionVolunteerPsychologyPeer reviewNursingMedicinePerceptionFamily medicineDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Several studies have demonstrated the positive effects of peer support on various breastfeeding outcomes, but no study has assessed women's and peer volunteers' views on, or the nature and intensity of, the supportive intervention. The objective of this study was to describe maternal and peer volunteer perceptions of their experience while participating in a breastfeeding peer support trial. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was conducted to evaluate the effect of telephone-based peer (mother-to-mother) support on breastfeeding duration. Two hundred and fifty-six primiparous breastfeeding women were randomly allocated to receive either conventional care or conventional care plus peer support. Three primary outcome measures were peer volunteer activity logs, maternal perceptions of peer support, and evaluations of the peer volunteer experience. RESULTS: Questionnaires were completed by 98.5 percent (n=130) of the mothers in the peer support group. Mothers reported their peer volunteers were available when difficulties were experienced, increased their confidence, decreased their concerns, and assisted them in reaching their breastfeeding goals. These supportive interactions resulted in 81.5 percent of mothers (n=106) being satisfied with their peer support experience and suggesting that every new mother should be offered this intervention. Similarly, all the peer volunteers interviewed (n=30) viewed their experience positively. They suggested some intervention modifications as follows: ensure that mothers enrolled in the program want peer support; provide peer volunteers with ongoing educational sessions and opportunities to "socialize" with other volunteers; and disseminate the results of peer support efforts. CONCLUSIONS: Both mothers and peer volunteers perceived their intervention experiences positively. Whereas maternal satisfaction was related to the number and duration of peer volunteer contacts, peer volunteers enjoyed their training session and the opportunity to assist mothers for a variety of reasons. Specific intervention modifications should be implemented to enhance peer volunteer satisfaction and retention.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.252 · 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