MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077607965 · doi:10.1177/0890334406297278

Understanding Breastfeeding Behavior: Rates and Shifts in Patterns in Québec

2007· article· en· W2077607965 on OpenAlexaffabout
Laura N. Haiek, Dany Gauthier, Dominique Brosseau, Lydia Rocheleau

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Human Lactation · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreastfeedingMedicineDemographyPsychological interventionPediatricsBreast feedingNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study objective was to measure breastfeeding rates and patterns in the Montérégie region of Québec. A survey of 632 mothers of 6-month-old infants was performed, of which 80% initiated breastfeeding, and 68% exclusively breastfed at birth. Breastfeeding rates progressively decreased with time: 63%, 56%, 51%, 44%, 39%, and 32% of mothers breastfed at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 months, respectively. Among mothers breastfeeding at a given period, 62%, 57%, 48%, 35%, and 10% of women exclusively breastfed since birth for 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 months, respectively. Exclusive breastfeeding for 6 months among the 200 women still breastfeeding was practically nonexistent. Introduction of nonhuman milk or solids was primarily responsible for the shift in patterns from exclusive to complementary feeding without passing through predominant breastfeeding. These findings confirm the need to prioritize effective hospital-based and community-based interventions to increase breastfeeding duration and exclusivity in the region.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 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

Citations34
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Human LactationSame topicBreastfeeding Practices and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207