Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Through the review of relevant literature this study illuminates the concepts of social marketing and breastfeeding. It specifically discusses the positioning of the link between social marketing and breastfeeding within different fields of study and develops a theoretical framework that tries to bridge the gap between those disciplines. METHOD: Various electronic databases were used and through systematic selection 11 scientific articles were identified that this literature review is based on. RESULTS: The review indicates that the relationship between social marketing and breastfeeding is complex. There are indications that this relationship is being investigated within three distinct fields of research: psychology/education, public health and marketing. Depending on the research field the emphasis is put on either breastfeeding or social marketing as well as on the other concepts that were discovered to be of importance within this relationship. Namely, group and individual demography as well as behaviour were revealed to be important elements of the link between social marketing and breastfeeding. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results this study concludes that a more multidimensional view on the relationship between the concepts under study is needed since the focus of previous studies is very one-sided and limited to just one element when all elements should be integrated equally.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".