Concept Analysis of Maternal Autonomy in the Context of Breastfeeding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to analyze the concept of maternal autonomy in the context of breastfeeding and propose a clearer definition of the concept. METHODS: A concept analysis was undertaken using Walker and Avant's eight-stage approach. FINDINGS: The concept analysis suggests that maternal autonomy in the context of breastfeeding refers to a mother's ability to make autonomous decisions using her control, agency, independence, and ethical reasoning. The antecedents are maternal competence, availability of support, nature of the setting, and available alternatives with respect to breastfeeding. The consequences are improvement in child health, maternal-child bonding, breastfeeding decisions, and maternal healthcare-seeking behavior. CONCLUSIONS: A clearer understanding of maternal autonomy in the context of breastfeeding will guide the development of a conceptual framework and expand nursing knowledge development. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: A clearer definition of the concept of maternal autonomy in the context of breastfeeding will guide clinicians, researchers, and policy makers in protecting, promoting, and supporting breastfeeding globally towards achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, 2015-2030.
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 | 0.013 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".