MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136587453 · doi:10.1177/089033440101700106

Psychosocial Factors Associated With the Abandonment of Breastfeeding Prior to Hospital Discharge

2001· article· en· W2136587453 on OpenAlexaff
Jane Scott, M. Landers, Roger Hughes, Colin Binns

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Human Lactation · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreastfeedingPsychosocialAbandonment (legal)MedicineHospital dischargePsychologyPsychiatryNursingPediatricsIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A prospective study of 556 women from Perth, Western Australia, and 503 women from the Darling Downs area, Queensland, Australia, was conducted to identify factors associated with the abandonment of breastfeeding prior to hospital discharge. In total, 88% of women initiated breastfeeding, but 5% discontinued breastfeeding while still in the hospital. Discontinuation of breastfeeding prior to discharge was associated with a number of psychosocial factors, namely, infant feeding method being chosen after becoming pregnant, a perception by the mother that the infant's father either preferred formula feeding or was ambivalent about how the infant was fed, and whether the mother's own mother had ever breastfed. Judicious questioning prenatally regarding a women's commitment to, social support for, and prior exposure to breastfeeding will help identify those women most at risk of abandoning breastfeeding prematurely. Such women should be targeted for additional support while in the hospital.

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)0.004
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations73
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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