MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2525805860 · doi:10.1177/2055102916671015

Using breastfeeding images to promote breastfeeding among young adults

2016· article· en· W2525805860 on OpenAlexafffund
Erin L. Austen, Joey Dignam, Petra Hauf

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Psychology Open · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
FundersHuman Resources and Skills Development Canada
KeywordsBreastfeedingPsychologyMedicineClinical psychologyPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Young adults' reactions to breastfeeding images were assessed using varied approaches. In Study 1, participants viewed posters from a breastfeeding campaign; many anticipated negative reaction to the campaign. In Study 2, participants viewed novel infant-feeding posters; breastfeeding posters were viewed for less time than bottle-feeding posters, regardless of the task assigned. In Study 3, participants were asked to rate their comfort level viewing infant-feeding images; greater discomfort was reported for breastfeeding images. Taken together, we argue that many young adults expect, and experience, discomfort viewing breastfeeding, but it is important to continue using breastfeeding images in promotion efforts.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.559
Threshold uncertainty score0.962

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.359 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations11
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Psychology OpenSame topicBreastfeeding Practices and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207