MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4245285279 · doi:10.31372//20190404.1023

Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy of Early Postpartum Mothers in an Urban Municipality in the Philippines

2020· article· en· W4245285279 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Artemio Jr Gonzales

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian/Pacific Island Nursing Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreastfeedingIntrapersonal communicationSelf-efficacyPostpartum periodMedicineDescriptive statisticsFamily medicinePsychologyDemographyPregnancyNursingObstetricsPediatricsInterpersonal communicationSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Studies on women have identified breastfeeding confidence as an important variable in influencing breastfeeding outcomes. The mother’s breastfeeding self-efficacy in the early postpartum period was a strong predictor of the duration of breastfeeding. This study aims to assess the breastfeeding self-efficacy of the postpartum mothers in urban barangays of San Jose Occidental Mindoro. The respondents of the study were 200 early postpartum mothers distributed equally chosen from four purposively selected urban barangays. The data collection technique was through a survey interview using 14-item Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy Scale-Short Form (BSES-SF) and a demographic questionnaire. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyze the data. The study revealed that postpartum mothers responded in the study were confident and has self-efficacy in breastfeeding their child as measured through technique and intrapersonal thought in breastfeeding. Moreover, the number of prenatal check up was positively correlated with breastfeeding self-efficacy. The result of the study can be used as a baseline assessment tool in the hospital at delivery to assist in identifying women who are at risk for early weaning.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.307
Threshold uncertainty score0.542

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian/Pacific Island Nursing JournalSame topicBreastfeeding Practices and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207