MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111390769 · doi:10.1186/1746-4358-5-10

Breastfeeding and HIV: experiences from a decade of prevention of postnatal HIV transmission in sub-Saharan Africa

2010· article· en· W2111390769 on OpenAlexafffund
Karen Marie Moland, Marina Manuela de Paoli, Daniel Sellen, Penny Van Esterik, Sebalda Leshabari, Astrid Blystad

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Breastfeeding Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of Health and Allied SciencesMuhimbili University of Health and Allied SciencesUniversitetet i BergenUniversity of TorontoYork University
KeywordsBreastfeedingMedicineHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)DilemmaInfant feedingTransmission (telecommunications)Breast feedingPublic healthDeveloping countryInfant nutritionThematic analysisPediatricsEnvironmental healthFamily medicinePopulationEconomic growthNursingQualitative researchResearch methodologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Infant feeding by HIV-infected mothers has been a major global public health dilemma and a highly controversial matter. The controversy is reflected in the different sets of WHO infant feeding guidelines that have been issued over the last two decades. This thematic series, 'Infant feeding and HIV: lessons learnt and ways ahead' highlights the multiple challenges that HIV-infected women, infant feeding counsellors and health systems have encountered trying to translate and implement the shifting infant feeding recommendations in different local contexts in sub-Saharan Africa. As a background for the papers making up the series, this editorial reviews the changes in the guidelines in view of the roll out of prevention of mother to child transmission (PMTCT) programmes in sub-Saharan Africa between 2001 and 2010.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.850
Threshold uncertainty score0.652

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations49
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Breastfeeding JournalSame topicBreastfeeding Practices and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207