Maternal perceived stress, HIV status, and feeding styles are predictors of infant dietary intake in Ghana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Indicators of poor maternal mental health have been associated with non-responsive feeding styles that affect dietary intake in infants. This study examined the association between maternal mental health indicators and infant dietary intake and infant feeding behaviors within a 2003 to 2008 longitudinal observational cohort study in Ghana (the Research to Improve Infant Nutrition and Growth [RIING] project). A random sample of one third of the RIING cohort (19 HIV positive [HIV-P], 29 HIV negative [HIV-N], and 24 HIV unknown [HIV-U]) and their infants was selected for an in-home 24-hr weighed dietary study at 9 months postpartum. Maternal depressive symptoms and perceived stress scores had been measured at 6 months using the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) and Perceived Stress Scale (PSS), respectively. All foods and liquids were weighed to determine energy and nutrient intake values. Human milk intake was weighed. Each feeding session was observed, and the feeding style was recorded. Multiple linear regression showed that maternal perceived stress was negatively associated with total food (-12.4 g, 95% CI: -21.0 to -3.8), energy (-19.5 kcal, 95% CI: -33.8 to -5.2), and fat (-0.7 g, 95% CI: -1.4 to -0.1) intake from complementary foods and liquids in infants. An HIV-P status was associated with a lower intake of fat (-6.3 g, 95% CI: -11.1 to -1.5) and vitamin A (-293.9 µg, 95% CI: -529.9 to -57.8) compared to HIV-N. Maternal mental health indicators were not associated with feeding style. However, a positive feeding style was associated with a higher intake of fat (4.8 g, 95% CI: 0.3 to 9.2) and vitamin A (245.3 µg, 95% CI: 28.2 to 462.5) compared to a passive feeding style. This study highlights the importance of focusing on how the infants are fed during the complementary feeding period. Interventions to improve infant dietary intake should prioritize maternal mental health and promote positive feeding styles among high-risk caregivers. Key words: maternal depression, perceived stress, HIV, infant, feeding style, diet, Ghana
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".