MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3206543540 · doi:10.1080/23293691.2021.1973844

Failure to Feed: Women’s Experiences of Breastfeeding and the Implications for Health Promotion Practice

2021· article· en· W3206543540 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Lauren N. Harrison, Alexandra Chin, Elena Neiterman

Bibliographic record

VenueWomen s Reproductive Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBreastfeedingDisappointmentPrideHealth promotionFeelingPublic healthMedicineNursingPromotion (chess)PsychologyQualitative researchBreastfeeding promotionSocial psychologyPolitical scienceSociologyPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Breastfeeding has been recognized as an ideal nutrition source for infants and has become a priority in public health. Here we explore women’s experiences of breastfeeding and contextualize them within the current public health discourse. Data from 37 qualitative interviews with Canadian women show that, whereas successful breastfeeding can be a source of pride, unsuccessful attempts to breastfeed prompt mothers to experience negative emotions and feelings of personal failure. Results suggest that there is a need to change the health promotion discourse, to acknowledge that unsuccessful breastfeeding is possible, and to offer women various supports to deal with the disappointment.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.265
Threshold uncertainty score0.527

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0170.017
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWomen s Reproductive HealthSame topicBreastfeeding Practices and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207