Caregiver Perspectives on Underutilization of WIC: A Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) is a federal program that improves the health of low-income women (pregnant and postpartum) and children up to 5 years of age in the United States. However, participation is suboptimal. We explored reasons for incomplete redemption of benefits and early dropout from WIC. METHODS: In 2020-2021, we conducted semistructured interviews to explore factors that influenced WIC program utilization among current WIC caregivers (n = 20) and caregivers choosing to leave while still eligible (n = 17) in Massachusetts. By using a deductive analytic approach, we developed a codebook grounded in the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. RESULTS: Themes across both current and early-leaving participants included positive feelings about social support from the WIC clinic staff and savings offered through the food package. Participants described reduced satisfaction related to insufficient funds for fruits and vegetables, food benefits inflexibility, concerns about in-clinic health tests, and in-store item mislabeling. Participants described how electronic benefit transfer cards and smartphone apps eased the use of benefits and reduced stigma during shopping. Some participants attributed leaving early to a belief that they were taking benefits from others. CONCLUSIONS: Current and early-leaving participants shared positive WIC experiences, but barriers to full participation exist. Food package modification may lead to improved redemption and retention, including increasing the cash value benefit for fruits and vegetables and diversifying food options. Research is needed regarding the misperception that participation means "taking" benefits away from someone else in need.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".