MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009406790 · doi:10.1177/1090198107303307

Psychosocial Determinants of the Early Introduction of Complementary Foods

2007· article· en· W2009406790 on OpenAlexaffabout
Fabiola Tatone–Tokuda, Lise Dubois, Manon Girard

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Education & Behavior · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychosocialSocioeconomic statusLogistic regressionMedicineEnvironmental healthBreast feedingChild developmentSocial classDemographyPsychologyPediatricsDevelopmental psychologyPopulationPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Infant feeding guidelines recommend exclusive breast-feeding to the age of 6 months; complementary foods should not be introduced before this age. This study examined parent and infant psychosocial determinants of the early introduction of complementary foods. Analyses were conducted on a representative sample of children born in Québec (Canada) in 1998 (n = 2,223), surveyed through the Québec Longitudinal Study of Child Development. Of the children, 61% received complementary foods prior to the age of 4 months. A multiple logistic regression analysis revealed the early introduction of complementary foods was more likely when mothers were younger, less educated, of lower socioeconomic class, and when they felt they had little influence on their child's development. Higher parental confidence in caring for the infant was also associated with the early introduction of complementary foods (p < or = .05). Future research must carefully consider the psychosocial aspects involved in adhering to infant feeding guidelines.

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)0.000
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 score0.277
Threshold uncertainty score0.358

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.379 · 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

Citations23
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Education & BehaviorSame topicBreastfeeding Practices and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207