Infant Feeding Perceptions and Barriers to Exclusive Breastfeeding in Urban and Rural Cameroon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Child malnutrition is highest in Sub-Saharan Africa. Over 45% of children in Cameroon die each year from malnutrition-related causes, most of which are preventable. Exclusive breastfeeding is a well-acknowledged and cost-effective intervention against malnutrition-related illnesses in children. However, the practice remains low in Cameroon. This study explored perceptions of mothers, care givers and key informants on infant feeding in Cameroon, and barriers to exclusive breastfeeding. Methods: A qualitative methodology was used, comprising key informant interviews and focus group discussions with nursing mothers, grandmothers and health workers; in one urban and one rural area in Cameroon. Participants were selected using convenience, purposive and snowball sampling methods. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. Results: Cameroonian mothers were supportive of breastfeeding. However, knowledge of exclusive breastfeeding and its benefits was poor. Mothers expressed doubts about its feasibility and showed concerns about satisfying their babies’ feeding and health needs. Barriers included factors which either affected women’s abilities to breastfeed or their babies’ satisfaction, family influences, other responsibilities, cultural and societal factors, and lack of support from the healthcare system. Conclusions: This study highlighted a sizeable gap between mothers’ lived experiences and infant feeding recommendations. Living in rural areas was an added disadvantage. Developing effective strategies to increase exclusive breastfeeding rates requires that mothers’ needs be understood and that influencing factors be addressed. Supportive environments are also required to promote and protect the rights and abilities of mothers to breastfeed exclusively.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".