MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057631336 · doi:10.5539/ass.v10n19p230

A Study of the Understanding amongst Academia towards the Islamic Concept of Breastfeeding

2014· article· en· W2057631336 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Normadiah Daud, Nadhirah Nordin, Azimah Shurfa Mohammed Shukry, Ramlah Mat Ali, Zainun Mohamed

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFiqhBreastfeedingIslamPerspective (graphical)Focus groupPsychologyMedical educationSociologyShariaMedicinePediatricsGeographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding the importance of breastfeeding from the Islamic perspective is important in ensuring the success of breastfeeding particularly amongst working mothers. The focus of this research is the understanding of the Islamic perspective on breastfeeding amongst university intellectuals who are considered to be highly educated and a role model for other women. This is a field study that employed the quantitative method where data were obtained through questionnaires and an interview with a specialist in the Islamic Family Jurisprudence (Fiqh). A total of 140 respondents were selected from the Malaysian higher education institutes such as UiTM Kuala Terengganu, University Malaysia Terengganu and Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin, Kuala Terengganu. The results showed that the respondents have a sound understanding with regards to breastfeeding from the Islamic perspective, scoring an average mean value of 2.67-3.92. This finding indicates that knowledge about breastfeeding according to Islam is an important foundation to the successful practice of breastfeeding. n, Development and mobilization in Iran are evaluated on the grounds of LEED for school rating system. In addition, Roshangar Primary school which was successfully built in accordance to the mentioned Iranian design principle is selected as the case study of research. Through a visual analysis, current practice of these design principles can be examined and presented in a clear view. The shortcomings of the above mentioned design principles will be discovered afterwards and recommendations will be presented in the conclusion of research.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicBreastfeeding Practices and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207