MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3206239929 · doi:10.36834/cmej.70049

Learning needs of family physicians, pediatricians and obstetricians to support breastfeeding and inform physician education

2021· article· en· W3206239929 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Krista Baerg, Juliet Smith-Fehr, J Marko, Amanda D. Loewy, Jill Blaser Farrukh, Tonia Olson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Education Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsSaskatchewan Health AuthoritySaskatchewan HealthUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreastfeedingSpecialtyFamily medicinePsychological interventionMedicineConfidence intervalNursingBreast feedingPsychologyPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Physicians require breastfeeding education appropriate to their roles. The aim of this survey was to determine physician learning needs and to inform development of breastfeeding education for physicians. METHODS: A cross sectional survey was distributed to family physicians, pediatricians and obstetricians in a tertiary institution. Importance of knowledge to practice and confidence to manage was assessed for 18 learning topics proposed by a multi-specialty physician working group. Descriptive statistics, ANOVA and tests for equality of variances were calculated. Mean values of importance to practice and confidence to manage for each topic suggested learning priorities. RESULTS: The study group included 75 physicians. The most important topics were "informed choice when supporting newborn feeding," "analgesics, antidepressants and other medications while breastfeeding" and "community resources for breastfeeding support." Confidence to manage was lowest for "latch assessment," "what mom can do during pregnancy to promote milk production," and "risk factors for delayed lactogenesis." Preferred learning formats were 15-minute online modules and grand rounds. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians acknowledged the importance of all topics but report lowest confidence to manage latch assessment, prenatal interventions to support lactogenesis and management of delayed lactogenesis. Participants placed relatively low importance on learning about latch assessment despite the central nature of this skill in supporting early breastfeeding.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score0.978

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Education JournalSame topicBreastfeeding Practices and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207