MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081930683 · doi:10.1177/0890334414559647

Assessing Infant Feeding Attitudes of Expectant Women in a Provincial Population in Canada

2014· article· en· W2081930683 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Human Lactation · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsJaneway Children's Health and Rehabilitation CentreNewfoundland and Labrador Centre for Applied Health ResearchMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreastfeedingCronbach's alphaMedicinePopulationDemographyRural areaInternal consistencyBreast feedingValidityScale (ratio)Predictive valueReceiver operating characteristicPredictive validityEnvironmental healthPediatricsPsychometricsGeographyClinical psychologyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Maternal attitudes to infant feeding are predictive of intent and initiation of breastfeeding. OBJECTIVES: The Iowa Infant Feeding Attitude Scale (IIFAS) has not been validated in the Canadian population. This study was conducted in Newfoundland and Labrador, a Canadian province with low breastfeeding rates. Objectives were to assess the reliability and validity of the IIFAS in expectant mothers; to compare attitudes to infant feeding in urban and rural areas; and to examine whether attitudes are associated with intent to breastfeed. METHODS: The IIFAS assessment tool was administered to 793 pregnant women. Differences in the total IIFAS scores were compared between urban and rural areas. Reliability and validity analysis was conducted on the IIFAS. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) of the IIFAS was assessed against mother's intent to breastfeed. RESULTS: The mean ± SD of the total IIFAS score of the overall sample was 64.0 ± 10.4. There were no significant differences in attitudes between urban (63.9 ± 10.5) and rural (64.4 ± 9.9) populations. There were significant differences in total IIFAS scores between women who intend to breastfeed (67.3 ± 8.3) and those who do not (51.6 ± 7.7), regardless of population region. The high value of the area under the curve (AUC) of the ROC (AUC = 0.92) demonstrates excellent ability of the IIFAS to predict intent to breastfeed. The internal consistency of the IIFAS was strong, with a Cronbach's alpha greater than .80 in the overall sample. CONCLUSION: The IIFAS examined in this provincial population provides a valid and reliable assessment of maternal attitudes toward infant feeding. This tool could be used to identify mothers less likely to breastfeed and to inform health promotion programs.

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 score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.714

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.302 · 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