Supporting breastfeeding: Tanzanian men’s knowledge and attitude towards exclusive breastfeeding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) is one of the key strategies to ensure infants and young children survive and grow. However, a 2010 study showed that it was only practiced by 50% of Tanzanian women. That study also found that men were rarely supportive; either at home or in the health facilities, due to their personal beliefs or to traditional beliefs and culture of the community. In a report six years later the rate of EBF has decreased to 30%, in one region. Methods: and how they can support their partners' breastfeeding. In addition, we assessed how they felt about spending time at home, if they considered handling the infant to be rewarding and whether they helped the mother with home chores. Differences in village infrastructure and characteristics were noted. Results: Five themes were identified, including traditional roles, and feelings of exclusion/inclusion and resistance. Men felt they needed better information on EBF. They wished that their partners could breastfeed for a longer time, since they realized it improved infant growth and prevented disease; however, they did not have time to remain with the infant at home. Poverty required the men to work for long periods outside the home. As well, the men were not involved with the Reproductive Child Health Clinic (RCHC) except at the time of delivery or for mandatory HIV testing, however, they wanted to be educated together with their partners at the RCHC. Conclusion: Most men in this study understood that the EBF period was important, and that it broadened their relationship with their partner. EBF, however, could be a challenge for couples because of poverty. Nevertheless, many men wanted to help and to become more involved.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".