Peer counselling improves breastfeeding practices: A cluster randomized controlled trial in urban Bangladesh
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the impact of peer counselling on early initiation of breastfeeding (EIBF) and exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) rates for mother-infant pairs living in urban slums, Dhaka, Bangladesh. This randomized controlled trial enrolled 350 mother-infant pairs from selected slums between September 2014 and July 2016. The women assigned to intervention group received peer counselling from locally recruited, trained community female volunteers starting in third trimester of pregnancy until 6 months after delivery; control group received no intervention. EIBF, any liquids given after birth, and EBF were compared between groups. Follow-up was scheduled at enrolment, following childbirth, and every 2 months up to 6 months after delivery. Multiple logistic regressions were used to assess the effect peer counselling and other associated factors on EIBF and EBF practices. EIBF rate was higher in the intervention group than in the control group (89.1% vs. 77.4%, p = .005). More mothers in intervention group were exclusively breastfeeding at 5 months than mothers in the control group (73% vs. 27%, p < .005). Control mothers were twice as likely to not practice EIBF compared with intervention mothers (adjusted odds risk [aOR]: 2.53, CI [1.29, 4.97], p = .007). Overall, caesarean section was associated with an 8.9-fold higher risk of not achieving EIBF (aOR: 8.90, CI [4.05, 19.55], p < .001). Intervention mothers were 5.10-fold more likely to practice EBF compared with control mothers (aOR: 5.10, CI [2.89, 9.01], p < .001) at 5 months. This study demonstrates peer counselling can positively influence both EIBF and EBF among mothers living in urban area.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".