MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3034786322 · doi:10.12927/hcpol.2020.26222

Triggering Institutional Change: Examining the Development of the 2001 Quebec Breastfeeding Policy

2020· article· en· W3034786322 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Maria Agnolon, Charo Rodríguez, Julie Lauzière

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare policy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité de SherbrookeCentre Integre de Sante et de Services Sociaux de Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreastfeedingPolitical scienceEconomic growthDevelopment economicsEconomicsMedicinePediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Quebec Government published Canada's first breastfeeding policy in 2001 with the goal to increase breastfeeding rates in the province. OBJECTIVE: To ultimately contribute to more informed policy decision-making, this investigation aimed to identify key stakeholders and understand events and processes that contributed to the establishment of this policy. METHODS: Building from the neo-institutional theory, this was a retrospective case study. Interviews with key informants were conducted, and several texts were compiled. Hybrid thematic analysis was used to analyze text transcribed verbatim from interviews. Resulting themes, summary of archival material and temporal bracketing were adopted to elaborate a historical narrative of the development of the policy. RESULTS: The emergence, development and initial implementation of the Quebec breastfeeding policy phases were traced from 1977 to 2009. The policy was triggered by a grassroots health professional movement that advocated for years for a cultural change toward breastfeeding in Quebec. Once Quebec's Ministry of Health finally accepted dialogue, institutional actors cooperated to formulate the policy. However, conflicts arose because of the Ministry's increasingly centralized mechanisms of governance. By 2009, discontent was so pervasive that several health professionals and other breastfeeding actors created an independent organization to further support breastfeeding, out of the Ministry's scope of control. CONCLUSION: Collaboration in this domain was possible when shared decision-making was accepted, but conflict emerged when the institutional actor with formal authority re-adopted traditional top-down modes of action.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.882
Threshold uncertainty score0.958

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.179
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare policySame topicBreastfeeding Practices and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207