Protecting both infant and mother: perceptions of infant feeding practices in rural Haiti
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Global recommendations for optimal breastfeeding include early initiation, exclusivity for six months, and continued breastfeeding for two years and beyond. Although breastfeeding is near universal in Haiti, gaps in optimal practices persist. Determinants of breastfeeding practices are complex, and a contextualized understanding is needed to strengthen breastfeeding support interventions. We conducted a qualitative study to explore mothers’ perceptions of factors influencing breastfeeding practices in rural Haiti. Methods Focus group discussions were held in eight rural communes participating in a nutrition project. Study participants (n=86) were recruited from mothers’ support groups. A moderator facilitated the focus groups in Haitian Creole using a question guide to elicit observations about community breastfeeding practices related to early initiation, colostrum feeding, complementary foods and beverages, and breastfeeding cessation. Focus groups were recorded, and three observers took notes which were compiled into a single report of key points and validated by participants following each session. Quotes representing the key points were selected from the audio recordings, translated into English and analyzed to identify explanatory themes. Results Participants described breastfeeding for 12-18 months as the norm in study areas, with early and frequent use of additional foods and beverages. Three explanatory themes were identified, related to concerns for (i) infant well-being, including digestive health, nutritional needs and contentment; (ii) transmission of negative maternal emotional and physical states through breast milk; and (iii) maternal well-being, including effects on breastfeeding practices of maternal illness, hunger, stress, and competing time pressures. Underlying all these concerns is the context of rural poverty and the cultural meanings of breastfeeding. Conclusions Findings suggest that practices which compromise global breastfeeding recommendations may persist because of their perceived value in addressing concerns for infant and maternal well-being in the challenging context of rural poverty, food insecurity and poor health. Multi-sectoral interventions are needed to mitigate these underlying contributors and create an enabling environment for early, exclusive and continued breastfeeding.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".