Assessing the Effectiveness of Policies Relating to Breastfeeding Promotion, Protection, and Support in Southeast Asia: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite its well-known benefits, breastfeeding practices remain suboptimal worldwide, including in Southeast Asia. Many countries in the region have thus enacted policies, such as maternity protection and the World Health Assembly International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes (the Code), that protect, promote, and support breastfeeding. Yet the impact of such national legislation on breastfeeding practices is not well understood. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to review the content, implementation, and potential impact of policies relating to maternity protection and the Code in Myanmar, the Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam. METHODS: This mixed methods study includes a desk review, trend and secondary data analyses, and quantitative and qualitative data collection. Desk reviews will examine and compare the contents, implementation strategies, coverage, monitoring, and enforcement of national policies focusing on maternity protection and the Code in each country with global standards. Trend and secondary data analyses will examine the potential impact of these policies on relevant variables such as breast milk substitute (BMS) sales and women's workforce participation. Quantitative data collection and analysis will be conducted to examine relevant stakeholders' and beneficiaries' perceptions about these policies. In each country, we will conduct up to 24 in-depth interviews (IDI) with stakeholders at national and provincial levels and 12 employers or 12 health workers. Per country, we will survey approximately 930 women who are pregnant or have a child aged 0-11 months, of whom approximately 36 will be invited for an IDI; 12 partners of the interviewed mothers or fathers of children from 0-11 months will also be interviewed. RESULTS: This study, funded in June 2018, was approved by the Institutional Review Boards of the relevant organizations (FHI 360: April 16, 2019 and May 18, 2020; and Hanoi University of Public Health: December 6, 2019). The dates of data collection are as follows: Vietnam: November and December 2019, May and June 2020; the Philippines: projected August 2020; Myanmar and Thailand: pending based on permissions and funding. Results are expected to be published in January 2021. As of July 2020, we had enrolled 1150 participants. We will present a comparison of key contents of the policies across countries and against international standards and recommendations and a comparison of implementation strategies, coverage, monitoring, and enforcement across countries. We will also present findings from secondary data and trend data analyses to propose the potential impact of a new or amended policy. For the surveys with women, we will present associations between exposure to maternity protection or BMS promotion on infant and young child feeding practices and their determinants. Findings from IDIs will highlight relevant stakeholders' and beneficiaries' perceptions. CONCLUSIONS: This study will increase the understanding of the effectiveness of policy interventions to improve breastfeeding, which will be used to advocate for stronger policy adoption and enforcement in study countries and beyond. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/21286.
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 | 0.018 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".