MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068377320 · doi:10.1177/0890334404272388

Beliefs, Attitudes, and Practices of Breastfeeding Mothers From a Periurban Community in South Africa

2005· article· en· W2068377320 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

VenueJournal of Human Lactation · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreastfeedingPsychological interventionMedicineBreast milkBreast feedingInfant formulaEnvironmental healthInfant feedingDemographyPediatricsNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to document the breastfeeding practices, beliefs, and attitudes of periurban South African lactating mothers with infants younger than 6 months. None of the mothers (n = 115, mean age 26 +/- 6.3 years) reported exclusively breastfeeding their infants, with complementary breastfeeding being the most practiced (78%) feeding mode. Complementary foods were fed to 32% of infants by their first month of life. Perceived inadequate production of breast milk was the most common (90%) reason cited for adding foods and liquids to breastfeeds. Mothers valued use of traditional herbal preparations (muthi), with more than half (56%) of the infants having received their first dose of muthi before 1 month of age. Our study provides important data on breastfeeding practices of women living within resource-poor settings. Development of successful infant-feeding interventions aimed at promoting overall infant health can benefit from knowledge of these breastfeeding patterns.

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)0.000
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 score0.219
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.296 · 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