Regional Analysis of Associations between Infant and Young Child Feeding Practices and Diarrhoea in Indian Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies on the association between infant and young child feeding (IYCF) practices and diarrhoea across regional India are limited. Hence, we examined the association between IYCF practices and diarrhoea in regional India. A weighted sample of 90,596 (North = 11,200, South = 16,469, East = 23,317, West = 11,512, Central = 24,870 and North-East = 3228) from the 2015-2016 National Family Health Survey in India was examined, using multivariate logistic regressions that adjust for clustering and sampling weights. The IYCF indicators included early initiation of breastfeeding (EIBF), exclusive breastfeeding (ExcBF), predominant breastfeeding (PBF), bottle feeding (BotF), continued breastfeeding (BF) at one-year, continued BF at two years, children ever breastfed and the introduction of solid, semi-solid or soft foods (ISSSF). Diarrhoea prevalence was lower among infants who were BF within one-hour of birth and those who were exclusively breastfed. Multivariate analyses revealed that continued BF at one and two years, and infants who were introduced to complementary foods had a higher prevalence of diarrhoea. EIBF and ExcBF were protective against diarrhoea in the regions of North, East and Central India. PBF, BotF and ISSSF were risk factors for diarrhoea in Central India. Continued BF at two years was a risk factor for diarrhoea in Western India. Findings suggested that EIBF and ExcBF were protective against diarrhoea in Northern, Eastern and Central India, while PBF, BotF, continued BF at two years and ISSSF were risk factors for diarrhoea in various regions in India. Improvements in IYCF practices are likely to reduce the burden of diarrhoea-related morbidity and mortality across regions in India.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".