Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy and Level of Acculturation among Low-Income Pregnant Latinas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The objective of the study was to determine whether less acculturated, compared to more acculturated, low-income pregnant Latinas, report higher levels of breastfeeding self-efficacy. Data on level of acculturation and breastfeeding self-efficacy were collected from 253 pregnant low-income Latinas. Methods: This study was cross-sectional. Results: This study found that less acculturated, compared to more acculturated, low-income pregnant Latinas had significantly higher breastfeeding self-efficacy. Conclusions: Evidence suggests that breastfeeding self-efficacy is one of the strongest modifiable factors linked to high breastfeeding rates. Moreover, prenatal interventions designed to increase breastfeeding self-efficacy have effectively done so. Taken together it appears that one strategy practitioners and researcher may consider to increase breastfeeding rates among more acculturated low-income Latinas is to design a culturally appropriate prenatal breastfeeding intervention aimed at improving breastfeeding self-efficacy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".