MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Path Analysis to Identify Factors Influencing the Provision of Water in Addition to Breast Milk by Mothers of Infants under Six Months of Age in Conakry and Kindia Regions, Republic of Guinea

2021· article· en· W4206400282 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Nèmanan Richard Ninamou, Jérémie B. Dupuis, Noël‐Marie Zagré, Mamady Daffé, Sonia Blaney

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Child Health and Nutrition · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
FundersUniversité de Moncton
KeywordsBreastfeedingMedicineBreast milkContext (archaeology)Promotion (chess)Breast feedingHealth promotionPath analysis (statistics)DemographyPediatricsEnvironmental healthFamily medicineDevelopmental psychologyNursingPublic healthPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water provision to infants under six months of age (IU6M) can hamper exclusive breastfeeding (EBF). Understanding factors and their relationships influencing this practice is needed to tailor EBF promotion programs. Using a validated questionnaire, this study aims to identify pathways in which individual factors and the environment interact to affect the provision of water in addition to breast milk among 300 mothers of IU6M. Our finding shows that 75% of mothers intended to provide water in addition to breast milk to their IU6M and that about 60% reported doing it. Results of the final path show that the subjective norm/SN (β = 0.432, p < 0.001), the attitude (β = 0.349, p < 0.001), and to a lesser extent the perceived control/PC (β = 0.141, p = 0.005) predict the intention of mothers to provide water in addition to breast milk to their IU6M. The environment scores predict the attitude (β = 0.210, p = 0.001) and the SN (β = 0.284, p < 0.001). Having the mother practicing early breastfeeding initiation at birth positively predicted the PC score (β = 0.157, p = 0.017) and predicted an increasing score of SN (β = 0.221, p = 0.003). Even though predicting the final behavior is complex, this research provides directions to nutrition education programs to tailor their content to the context and be more efficient in reducing the proportion of women providing water to their IU6M, hence contributing to the improvement of EBF.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.314 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Child Health and NutritionSame topicBreastfeeding Practices and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207