Infant feeding experiences and concerns among caregivers early in the COVID‐19 State of Emergency in Nova Scotia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The global emergency caused by the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has impacted access to goods and services such as health care and social supports, but the impact on infant feeding remains unclear. Thus, the objective of this study was to explore how caregivers of infants under 6 months of age perceived changes to infant feeding and other food and health-related matters during the COVID-19 State of Emergency in Nova Scotia, Canada. Four weeks after the State of Emergency began, between 17 April and 15 May 2020, caregivers completed this online survey, including the Perceived Stress Scale. Participants (n = 335) were 99% female and mostly White (87%). Over half (60%) were breastfeeding, and 71% had a household income over CAD$60,000. Most participants (77%) received governmental parental benefits before the emergency, and 59% experienced no COVID-19-related economic changes. Over three quarters of participants (77%) scored moderate levels of perceived stress. Common themes of concern included social isolation, COVID-19 infection (both caregiver and infant), and a lack of access to goods, namely, human milk substitutes ('infant formula'), and services, including health care, lactation support, and social supports. Most COVID-19-related information was sought from the internet and social media, so for broad reach, future evidence-based information should be shared via online platforms. Although participants were experiencing moderate self-perceived stress and shared numerous concerns, very few COVID-19-related changes to infant feeding were reported, and there were few differences by socio-economic status, likely due to a strong economic safety net in this Canadian setting.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".