A Short Message Service Intervention for Improving Infant Feeding Practices in Shanghai, China: Planning, Implementation, and Process Evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although mobile health (mHealth) has been widely applied in health care services, few studies have reported the detailed process of the development and implementation of text messaging (short message service, SMS) interventions. OBJECTIVE: Our study aims to demonstrate the process and lessons learned from a community-based text messaging (SMS) intervention for improving infant feeding in Shanghai, China. METHODS: The intervention included planning and development, implementation, and process evaluation. A 3-phase process was adopted during planning and development: (1) a formative study with expectant and new mothers to explore the barriers of appropriate infant feeding practices; (2) a baseline questionnaire survey to understand potential intervention approaches; and (3) development of the text message bank. The text messaging intervention was delivered via a computer-based platform. A message bank was established before the start of the intervention containing information on the benefits of breastfeeding, preparing for breastfeeding, early initiation of breastfeeding, timely introduction of complementary foods, and establishing appropriate feeding practices, etc. An expert advisory committee oversaw the content and quality of the message bank. Process evaluation was conducted through field records and qualitative interviews with participating mothers. RESULTS: We found that the text messaging intervention was feasible and well received by mothers because of its easy and flexible access. The weekly based message frequency was thought to be appropriate, and the contents were anticipatory and trustworthy. Some mothers had high expectations for timely response to inquiries. Occasionally, the text messages were not delivered due to unstable telecommunication transmission. Mothers suggested that the messages could be more personalized. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the feasibility and value of text messaging intervention in filling gaps in delivering health care services and promoting healthy infant feeding practices in settings where personal contact is limited.
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 | 0.016 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".