Mothers’ infant feeding experiences: constraints and supports for optimal feeding in an HIV-impacted urban community in South Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To better understand the enabling and challenging factors impacting on infant feeding practices in communities with a high HIV prevalence. DESIGN: Qualitative study, with data collected through in-depth interviews and observations of mothers, in addition to discussions with health-service providers. SETTING: Urban settlement in the province of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. SUBJECTS: Mothers recruited from an HIV clinic and from within the community. RESULTS: Emerging from discussions with mothers on the acceptability of alternative feeding methods were the challenges they encountered in feeding their infants. Mothers readily identified feeding in the context of HIV infection as an issue of great concern, encompassing three central themes: (i) stigma and disclosure of HIV; (ii) confusion and coercion; and (iii) diarrhoea, sickness and free formula. It became evident that mothers rarely received quality infant feeding counselling and consequently mixed feeding, a widespread practice but one that is highly risky for HIV transmission, remained a common feeding practice. Exclusive breast-feeding (EBF) was best practised with support, following disclosure of HIV status. Availability of free formula did not guarantee exclusive formula feeding but instead led to inappropriate feeding practices. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to providing accurate information, health-care workers must be empowered to counsel mothers effectively, addressing issues of disclosure and thereby facilitating mobilization of maternal support networks. These findings illustrate the challenges that exist in policy translation within the context of quality of training for health-care workers on optimizing maternal infant feeding practices, particularly in HIV-prevalent, resource-poor settings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".