Effect of Training Program on Knowledge and Practice of Breast feeding Women During COVID-19
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim Evaluate the effect of the training program on knowledge and practice of breastfeeding women during coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods One-group pretest/post-test quasiexperimental research design was utilized to accomplish the aim of this study. The study was carried out at the primary health care units Ad Dar Al Baida 1, Ad Dar Al Baida 2, Al Aziziyah at Riyadh Province of Saudi Arabia. The study included a convenience sample of 100 breastfeeding women. Tool A structured interviewing questionnaire sheet was used for data collection that included three parts knowledge, reported practice, and demographic characteristics. Results More than one-quarter (30%) and (28%) of studied women had satisfactory knowledge-related causes, risk factor and signs, symptoms of COVID-19 at preintervention, while the majority 85% and 86% of them had satisfactory knowledge postintervention at p-value <.01**. In addition, less than one-fifth (17%) and (16%) of studied women had satisfactory knowledge about Breastfeeding guidelines during COVID-19 and care of breastfeeding women during COVID-19, compared with most of them (89%) and (92%) postintervention at p-value <.01**. Conclusion Based on our current study, it was concluded that the educational program effectively improves breastfeeding women's knowledge and practices. There was a highly statistically significant positive linear correlation between the breastfeeding women's knowledge and reported practices regarding COVID-19 infection before and after the implementation of the educational program at p < .0.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".