MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801763336 · doi:10.2196/mhealth.9999

How New and Expecting Fathers Engage With an App-Based Online Forum: Qualitative Analysis

2018· article· en· W2801763336 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Becky K White, Roslyn Giglia, Jane Scott, Sharyn Burns

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCurtin University of TechnologyHealthwayAustralian Government
KeywordsConversationThematic analysisBreastfeedingmHealthPeer supportInternet privacySocial supportSocial mediaPsychologyOnline discussionQualitative researchWorld Wide WebMedical educationMedicineNursingSocial psychologyComputer scienceSociologyPsychological interventionCommunicationPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Breastfeeding is important for infants, and fathers are influential in supporting their partner in their decision to breastfeed and how long they breastfeed for. Fathers can feel excluded from traditional antenatal education and support opportunities but highly value social support from peers. Online health forums can be a useful source of social support, yet little is known about how fathers would use a conversation forum embedded in a breastfeeding-focused app. Milk Man is a mobile app that aimed to increase paternal support for breastfeeding using a range of strategies, including a conversation forum. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine how fathers used a breastfeeding-focused conversation forum contained within a mobile app throughout the perinatal period. METHODS: A qualitative analysis of comments posted by users in the online forum contained within the Milk Man app was conducted. The app contained a library of information for fathers, as well as a conversation forum. Thematic analysis was used to organize and understand the data. The NVivo 11 software package was used to code comments into common nodes, which were then organized into key themes. RESULTS: In all, 208 contributors (35.5% [208/586] of those who had access to the app) posted at least once within the forum. In total, 1497 comments were included for analysis. These comments were coded to 3799 individual nodes and then summarized to 54 tree nodes from which four themes emerged to describe how fathers used the app. Themes included seek and offer support, social connection, informational support provision, and sharing experiences. Posting in the forum was concentrated in the antenatal period and up to approximately 6 weeks postpartum. CONCLUSIONS: These data show that fathers are prepared to use a breastfeeding-focused online forum in a variety of ways to facilitate social support. Fathers can be difficult to reach in the perinatal period, yet engaging them and increasing social support is important. This research demonstrates the acceptability of an innovative way of engaging new and expecting fathers.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.476
Threshold uncertainty score0.564

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.351 · 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

Citations41
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicBreastfeeding Practices and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207