Interventions to Improve Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy and Resultant Breastfeeding Rates: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Maternal breastfeeding self-efficacy (BSE) is reflective of a mother's confidence in breastfeeding and is a modifiable factor that may improve breastfeeding rates. Breastfeeding self-efficacy theory purports that women with higher BSE will have better breastfeeding outcomes. Research aim: The aim of this systematic review was to explore the theoretical link between BSE and breastfeeding outcomes by investigating (a) if interventions to improve BSE were successful and (b) if improvements in BSE resulted in improved breastfeeding rates. METHODS: The authors performed a systematic search of 10 databases for studies that investigated the effect of interventions for mothers of full-term infants on BSE and breastfeeding rates. They used an inverse-variance, random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: Of 1,366 titles and abstracts identified, 58 full-text articles were screened and 11 met the study criteria. Compared with mothers in control groups, mothers in intervention groups had significantly higher BSE, scoring 4.86 points higher, 95% confidence interval [3.11, 6.61], at 2 months postpartum. Mothers in the intervention groups were 1.56 and 1.66 times more likely to be breastfeeding at 1 month and 2 months postpartum, respectively. Interventions that were implemented in the postpartum period, used combined delivery settings, or were informed by BSE theory had the greatest influence on breastfeeding outcomes. Meta-regression indicated that for each 1-point increase in the mean BSE score between the intervention and control groups, the odds of exclusive breastfeeding increased by 10% in the intervention group. CONCLUSION: Breastfeeding self-efficacy is a modifiable factor that practitioners can target to improve breastfeeding rates in mothers of full-term infants.
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.
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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it