Women’s Knowledge and Attitudes on Established Breastmilk Bank in Limpopo Province, South Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Breastfeeding is recommended as the best practice which results in normal growth and development of the healthy infants. In cases where the mother is unable to provide adequate breastmilk due to unavoidable circumstances, pasteurised donated breastmilk from the bank should be considered for hospitalized or preterm babies. OBJECTIVES: To explore and describe women’s knowledge and attitudes related to established breastmilk bank in Mankweng area. METHODS: An explorative descriptive contextual qualitative research was conducted. Data was collected using semi-structured, one-on-one interviews at the rural hospital and a rural clinic in Limpopo province. Purposive sampling method was used to select participants of this study. Adherence to criteria for trustworthiness was aimed at ensuring that the findings become credible, transferable, confirmable and dependable. Ethical standards were adhered to in order to protect identity, dignity, rights and welfare of the study participants. Data was analysed using Tesch’s open coding method. FINDINGS: Women at the hospital have knowledge related to breastmilk bank whilst the ones at the clinic have insufficient knowledge about breastmilk bank. The participants have shown positive attitudes towards donating breastmilk to the bank, whilst on the other hand negative attitudes towards receiving donated breastmilk from the bank were identified due to fears of contracting infections mainly HIV. CONCLUSION: Women at the clinic, have insufficient knowledge and negative attitudes towards the established breastmilk bank. However, they were more willing to donate rather than to accept donated human milk from the bank. On the other hand, women at the hospital are knowledgeable about the breastmilk bank and they revealed positive attitudes towards the established breastmilk bank. It is recommended that the established breastmilk bank should be well promoted and well publicised to the community members in order to utilise the bank effectively and efficiently.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".