Women's Experiences of Breastfeeding-Related Pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Breastfeeding-related pain is commonly experienced early in the postpartum period and is an important contributor to breastfeeding cessation, yet little is known about what this pain means to women and how it is experienced. The purpose of this study was to gain a better understanding of the phenomenon of breastfeeding-related pain, how women experience this pain, and the meaning it holds for them. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Interpretive descriptive methods and inductive content analysis were used. Women were recruited using purposive sampling with a snowball approach. Data were collected via one-to-one interviews using a semistructured interview guide with postpartum women having experienced breastfeeding-related pain in the past 2 months. RESULTS: Fourteen postpartum women who met inclusion criteria were interviewed. They were predominantly Caucasian, well educated, and had greater than average Canadian annual household incomes. The dominant emerging discourse revealed three key themes: (a) interplay between breastfeeding pain and context, (b) action enablers and/or barriers, and (c) breastfeeding outcomes. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Breastfeeding-related pain is an unpleasant sensory and affective experience for women during the postpartum period. Availability and accessibility of breastfeeding supports are essential to enable women to achieve their breastfeeding goals. Providing anticipatory guidance may help women to cope more effectively with their breastfeeding-related pain.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".