At the Edges of Embodiment: Determinants of Breastfeeding for First Nations Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In Canada, First Nations women are far less likely to breastfeed than other women. First Nations people have been subjected to massive health and social disparities and are at the lowest end of the scale on every measure of well-being. The purpose of this study is to understand the experiences, strengths, and challenges of breastfeeding for First Nations women. Central to the current research is the notion of an embodiment within indigenous women's health and, more specifically, breastfeeding perspectives. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Guided by an indigenous feminist standpoint, our research study evolved through honest discussions and is informed by relevant public health literature on breastfeeding. We collected quantitative data through a survey on demographics and feeding practices, and we conducted focus groups in three Canadian provinces (British Columbia, Manitoba, and Ontario) over a period of 1 year (2010) from 65 women in seven First Nation communities. RESULTS: Three overarching themes are discussed: social factors, including perceptions of self; breastfeeding environments; and intimacy, including the contribution of fathers. The main findings are that breastfeeding is conducive to bed sharing, whereas a history of residential school attendance, physical and psychological trauma, evacuations for childbirth, and teen pregnancy are obstacles to breastfeeding. Also, fathers play a pivotal role in a woman's decision to breastfeed. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study contribute to informing public health by reconsidering simplistic health promotion and public health policies and, instead, educating First Nations communities about the complexity of factors associated with multiple breastfeeding environments.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".