MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2967375049 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v11n10p105

Breast Feeding Practices: Comparison Between Educated and Illiterate Mothers in Kathmandu, Nepal

2019· article· en· W2967375049 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Milan Acharya, Balram Devkota, Madhav Kukar Shrestha

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Health and Population
KeywordsBreastfeedingContext (archaeology)Breast feedingMedicineBreast milkPediatricsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Breastfeeding practice is important to determine the children’s mortality and morbidity in the context of Nepal. The aim of this research was to compare the breastfeeding practices dominant among the educated and illiterate mothers of reproductive age (15-49) in Kathmandu Valley. The research was aimed at comparing the breastfeeding practices of women at different age groups, and exploring the issues of the frequency of breastfeeding among the educated and illiterate mothers. It was carried in four communities of Kirtipur Municipality that is located in the Valley. Educated mothers (from the School Leaving Certificate passed to Master’s Degree holders) with their children were encompassed in this research study and the statistics and the meanings were collected by means of the piloted opinionaire on breastfeeding practices. The result showed that most of the mothers who were illiterate had better practices of breastfeeding as compared with the educated mothers. This research highlights the necessity for breastfeeding involvement packages particularly for the educated mothers who know the techniques of breastfeeding but don’t want to do so on time due to a busy life schedule and concerning the appearance and beauty of their body.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.355 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health ScienceSame topicBreastfeeding Practices and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207