Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative for Neonatal Wards: impact on breastfeeding practices among preterm infants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: to assess breastfeeding support practices for preterm infants at two Baby-Friendly hospitals in southeastern Brazil, comparing the effect of implementing the guidelines for Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative for Neonatal wards. METHODS: a quasi-experimental study, pre- and post-intervention with control. Implementation of this initiative in the intervention hospital using Knowledge Translation. Data collection on compliance with the adapted Ten Steps, Three Guiding Principles and the Code before and after the intervention was carried out via interviews with mothers of preterm babies and professionals, unit observation and documentary analysis in the intervention and control hospitals. Intra-intergroup comparison was performed. RESULTS: increases in global compliance with the Three Principles, Ten Steps, the Code, partial compliance with each Principle and in most Steps was greater in the intervention hospital. Conclusion: this initiative improved practices related to breastfeeding in the intervention hospital, demonstrating the potential to improve care and breastfeeding in neonatal wards.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".