MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2804288472 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxy054.072

MATERNAL VIRTUAL INFANT NUTRITION SUPPORT CLINIC FOR THE NEONATAL INTENSIVE CARE UNIT (MAVINS-NICU) - A QUALITATIVE STUDY

2018· article· en· W2804288472 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Stientje Rai

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreastfeedingNeonatal intensive care unitMedicinePhonePeer supportIntensive careQualitative researchNursingPediatricsFamily medicinePsychologyIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract BACKGROUND Canadian exclusive breastfeeding rates at 6 months of age are only 24.2%, and are even lower in mothers of infants requiring Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) admission. An interactive website was developed that provides professional (articles, videos) and peer (discussion forum for peers, access to a lactation consultant) breastfeeding support to mothers of infants requiring NICU admission. OBJECTIVES The objective of the study is to outline maternal perceptions of the breastfeeding support website (MAVINS-NICU) in a level-III NICU setting. DESIGN/METHODS This study represents the qualitative research component of the MAVINS-NICU project. Semi-structured interviews were conducted antenatally with women at risk of delivering an infant requiring NICU admission (n=6), and postnatally with mothers of infants admitted to the NICU (n=7), regarding their experiences with the MAVINS-NICU website. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed by a professional transcriptionist. Analysis occurred in an iterative fashion using open and axial coding strategies to identify majors themes. RESULTS Several themes were identified: 1) Women seemed comforted that a reliable hospital-provided resource would be available to them after birth, “…I’m very happy that I’m going to have lots of support”; 2) Women felt overwhelmed after birth, but often accessed the website on their phone or read newly posted comments on the discussion forum in response to automatically generated weekly emails from the website, “I’m just, overwhelmed… because I’m [in the NICU a lot], I only have my phone and it’s just easier to look at the emails… [they] just pop up”; 3) Mothers felt extremely comforted by the peer support component of the website, “to see what other moms are going through … similar emotions or issues … to see that I’m not the only one [helps]”; 4) Mothers enjoyed remote access and quick online lactation consultant response times, “ … [you can] get help even when there’s no one around”, “I was really surprised … by how quickly I got responses”; 5) Majority of mothers expressed a sense of empowerment to provide breast milk with the help of MAVINS support, “…being able to breastfeed eventually is a big deal for me… [it made me feel] like I was accomplishing something”. CONCLUSION Mothers of infants admitted to the NICU found the MAVINS-NICU website very helpful and considered it part of their success in providing breast milk for their babies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.361 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences→French-language works237,207→