Infant feeding practices among HIV-exposed infants less than 6 months of age in Bomet County, Kenya: an in-depth qualitative study of feeding choices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In children, HIV can be acquired from the mother during pregnancy, delivery and through breast milk. The WHO recommends exclusive breast feeding or exclusive replacement feeding for the first 6 months after birth for HIV-exposed infants. Barriers such as HIV-related stigma, inadequate resources, lack of access to safe water and negative cultural beliefs have been shown to influence infant feeding among HIV-exposed infants in some settings. In Kenya, there is limited literature on the barriers. The purpose of this study was to identify barriers to optimal feeding among HIV-exposed infants 0-5 months of age attending a mission hospital in Bomet County, Kenya. METHODS: A cross-sectional qualitative study was conducted at a referral mission hospital in Bomet County, Southwest Kenya. Four focused group discussions were conducted among mothers/caregivers of HIV-exposed infants aged 0-5 months in accordance with their infant feeding practices, while two key informant interviews were also held with healthcare workers. All sessions were audio recorded and later transcribed verbatim. Content analysis was performed, and conclusions were made based on identified themes. RESULTS: Factors influencing the infant feeding choices were: financial constraints, cultural beliefs and practices, HIV-related stigma and conflicting knowledge among mothers/caregivers and healthcare workers on the recommendations for feeding HIV-exposed infants 0-5 months of age. CONCLUSIONS: Health worker retraining in and reinforcement of WHO guidance on feeding HIV exposed/infected infants will clarify misconceptions around feeding HIV exposed/infected infants, though there remain social and economic barriers to full implementation.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".