MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095923410 · doi:10.1177/0890334411429111

Maternal Attachment Representations and Initiation and Duration of Breastfeeding

2012· article· en· W2095923410 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 · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsTrent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreastfeedingDuration (music)DemographicsMoodAttachment theoryLongitudinal studyMedicinePsychologyDevelopmental psychologyBreast feedingFormula feedingClinical psychologyDemographyPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the evidence that there are considerable benefits of breastfeeding, there are still gaps in understanding why many women have difficulties initiating and maintaining breastfeeding. In this prospective longitudinal study, the factors affecting the initiation and duration of breastfeeding were expanded to include attachment representations, which are known to influence health behaviors as well as one's ability to cope with stressful situations. Participants (n = 460) completed attachment and depression questionnaires during a prenatal clinic appointment, and in the postpartum period, mothers reported on their mood and breastfeeding behaviors. Consistent with attachment theory and previous research, women with attachment approach orientations were more likely to breastfeed, breastfeed longer, and continue breastfeeding when they experienced initial difficulties. The results of this study demonstrate that it is important to look beyond demographics to understand breastfeeding initiation and duration and provide further evidence that attachment representations influence health decisions.

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)0.000
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.200

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.381 · 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