Understanding the challenges related to breastfeeding education and barriers to curricular change: a systems perspective for transforming health professions education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: A majority of women and families wish that their babies be breastfed. However, too many still receive insufficient or inappropriate initial care from health professionals (HPs) who have limited breastfeeding (BF) competencies. We investigated barriers and potential solutions to improve the undergraduate training programs for various HPs. Methods: Focus groups were carried out in three universities in Quebec and one in Ontario (Canada), with 30 faculty and program directors from medicine, midwifery, nursing, nutrition, and pharmacy. Discussions were subjected to thematic content analysis, before being validated in a strategic planning workshop with 48 participants from the same disciplines, plus dentistry and chiropractic. Findings: Substantive improvements of undergraduate training programs for BF could be obtained by addressing challenges related to the insufficient, or lack of, (i) interactions among various HPs, (ii) opportunities for practical learning, (iii) specific standards to guide course content, (iv) real-life experience with counselling, and (v) understanding of the influence of attitudes on professional practice. Several potential solutions were proposed and validated. The re-interpretation of the results in light of various literature led to an emerging framework that takes a systems perspective for enhancing the education of HPs on BF. Conclusions: To improve the education of HPs so as to enable them to provide relevant support for future mothers, mothers and their families, solutions need to be carried out to address challenges in the health system, the education system as well as regarding the curricular change process.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 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".