MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3149044894 · doi:10.1186/s12889-021-10675-2

Determinants of infant feeding practices among Black mothers living with HIV: a multinomial logistic regression analysis

2021· article· en· W3149044894 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Josephine Etowa, Jean Hannan, Egbe B. Etowa, Seye Babatunde, J. Craig Phillips

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Public Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WindsorUniversity of Ottawa
FundersInstitute of Infection and ImmunityCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBiostatisticsMedicineMultinomial logistic regressionLogistic regressionPublic healthDemographyEpidemiologyEnvironmental healthHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Socioeconomic statusRegression analysisPediatricsGerontologyFamily medicinePopulationStatisticsInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Infant feeding practices are imperative for babies' and mothers' health and emotional wellbeing. Although infant feeding may seem simple, the decisions surrounding it are complex and have far-reaching implications for women globally. This is an especially difficult concern among mothers living with HIV because breastfeeding can transmit HIV from mother to child. This is further complicated by cultural expectations in case of Black mothers living with HIV. This paper discusses determinants of infant feeding practices among Black mothers living with HIV who were on anti-retroviral therapy (ART) in two North American cites and one African city. METHODS: A cross-sectional, multi-country survey using venue-based convenience sampling of Black mothers living with HIV was employed. The effective response rates were 89% (n = 89) in Ottawa, Canada; 67% (n = 201) in Miami, Florida, US; and 100% (n = 400) in Port Harcourt, Nigeria, equaling a total sample size of 690. Data were collected in Qualtrics and managed in Excel and SPSS. Multinomial logistic regression analyses were used to determine the factors influencing the mothers' infant feeding practices (Exclusive Formula Feeding [EFF] = 1; Mixed Feeding [MF] = 2; and Exclusive Breastfeeding [EBF while on ART] =3). RESULTS: The results highlight socio-demographics, EFF determinants, and EBF determinants. The statistically significant determinants of infant feeding practices included national guideline on infant feeding, cultural beliefs and practices, healthcare systems, healthcare personnel, infant feeding attitudes, social support, and perceived stress. Mothers' mean ages were Ottawa (36.6 ± 6.4), Miami (32.4 ± 5.8), and Port Harcourt (34.7 ± 5.7). All sampled women gave birth to least one infant after their HIV diagnoses. Statistically significant (p < .05) determinants of EFF relative to MF were the national guideline of EFF (relative risk [RR] = 218.19), cultural beliefs (RR = .15), received healthcare (RR = 21.17), received healthcare through a nurse/midwife (RR = 3.1), and perceived stress (RR = .9). Statistically significant determinants of EBF relative to MF were received healthcare (RR = 20.26), received healthcare through a nurse/midwife (RR = 2.31), functional social support (RR = 1.07), and perceived stress (RR = .9). CONCLUSION: While cultural beliefs and perceived stress favoured MF over EFF, advice of healthcare workers, and the care received from a nurse/midwife improved EFF over MF. Also while the mothers' perceived stress favoured MF over EBF, advice of their nurses or midwife and the social support improved EBF over MF. The providers advice was congruent with WHO and national guidelines for infant feeding among mothers living with HIV. These results have implications for nursing, healthcare practice, and policies on infant feeding practices for mothers living with HIV.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations16
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Public HealthSame topicBreastfeeding Practices and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207