Compliance With the “Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative for Neonatal Wards” in Russian Hospitals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The expansion of the Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative to neonatal wards, known as the Neo-BFHI, provides recommendations to support breastfeeding, as outlined in the Three Guiding Principles, the expanded Ten Steps, and the International Code for Marketing of Breast-Milk Substitutes. In 2017, Russia participated in an international survey about compliance with the Neo-BFHI. Research Aim To assess breastfeeding support policies and practices in Russian neonatal wards at the country and federal district level in accordance with the Neo-BFHI recommendations. Methods This study was a prospective cross-sectional survey. We used the Neo-BFHI Self-Assessment questionnaire to collect data from neonatal wards that had all levels of care. A total of N = 60 Russian neonatal wards in hospitals that have ever been designated Baby-Friendly or planned to do so participated in the survey. Results Compliance scores at the federal district and country level ranging from 0–100 were used to summarize results. The median country overall score was 90 ( IQR = 83 – 93). Respect for mothers, continuity of care, having a breastfeeding policy, and rooming-in had the highest median scores. Family-centered care, antenatal informing, skin-to-skin contact, and human milk use had the lowest median scores. Neonatal wards in the hospitals that were ever designated as Baby-Friendly had significantly higher scores than those that were never designated. Most respondents ( n = 48, 80%) expressed a desire to obtain Neo-BFHI designation in their neonatal wards. Conclusion Neo-BFHI recommendations can be successfully implemented in Russian neonatal wards at hospitals designated Baby-Friendly or planning to be designated.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".