Feeding practices among Indonesian children above six months of age: a literature review on their potential determinants (part 2).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Feeding practices among young children are not optimal in Indonesia. Improving these practices is crucial to prevent and reduce malnutrition among young children. A better understanding of the underlying factors to appropriate practices is essential to address barriers and identify opportunities to optimal practices. This paper aims to shed light on potential determinants of feeding practices among children above 6 months of age. METHODS: A systematic research of several databases using combinations of different search terms: feeding, child, Indonesia, MPASI/complementary food, gizi/nutrition, factor, determinant, praktek/practices was conducted. All documents were reviewed using a three-step procedure to assess content appropriateness and research quality. Data were analyzed using the Hector's framework on behaviour change. RESULTS: Available data on individual factors influencing feeding practices related mainly to mother's attributes, namely knowledge, perceptions, attitudes, beliefs and skills. Some of them are positively linked to good practices. Some environmental-related factors such as health services, home and peer environment were conducive to improved practices. Studies on societal factors were mostly restricted to food systems which do not favour optimal feeding practices. CONCLUSIONS: The review provides insights on underlying factors conducive to optimal feeding practices. Yet, relevant and quality research is required to get a better understanding on factors related to the environment and society as well as on how they are related with each other and operate in different contexts. Indonesia has already experimented successful programs which can be used as a reference to strengthen young child feeding practices.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".