The Impact of a History of Adverse Childhood Experiences on Breastfeeding Initiation and Exclusivity: Findings from a National Population Health Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Exclusive breastfeeding is strongly recommended by the World Health Organization. Given the low rate of exclusive breastfeeding in Canada and the increasing reports of a history of adverse childhood experiences, this study sought to investigate the association between a history of adverse childhood experiences and breastfeeding initiation and breastfeeding. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data used for this study were based on the 2011-2012 Canadian Community Health Survey, collected using a cross-sectional survey. The outcome measures were breastfeeding initiation and exclusive breastfeeding for 6 months or more. History of adverse childhood experiences was the main explanatory variable. Multivariable logistic regression models were developed to investigate the effect on breastfeeding initiation and on exclusive breastfeeding in women who gave birth within 5 years before when the surveys were conducted. RESULTS: The study sample included 697 and 633 women for analyses on breastfeeding initiation and breastfeeding, respectively. The proportion of women with breastfeeding initiation and exclusive breastfeeding for up to 6 months in this study were 96.8% and 42.8%, respectively. After controlling for age and highest level of education, having a history of adverse childhood experiences was not significantly associated with breastfeeding initiation (odds ratio [OR] 0.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.10-1.87), but mothers with such history were less likely to exclusively breastfeed for up to 6 months compared with those without (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.31-0.90). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest the need for more breastfeeding monitoring programs beyond the hospital environment to provide more support to Canadian mothers, especially those who have experienced adverse childhood experiences or trauma in the past.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".