Infant feeding experiences among Indigenous communities in Canada, the United States, Australia, and Aotearoa: a scoping review of the qualitative literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although exclusive breastfeeding is recommended for the first six months of life, research suggests that breastfeeding initiation rates and duration among Indigenous communities differ from this recommendation. Qualitative studies point to a variety of factors influencing infant feeding decisions; however, there has been no collective review of this literature published to date. Therefore, the objective of this scoping review was to identify and summarize the qualitative literature regarding Indigenous infant feeding experiences within Canada, the United States, Australia, and Aotearoa. METHODS: Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses- Scoping Reviews and the Joanna Briggs Institute Guidelines, in October 2020, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Scopus were searched for relevant papers focusing on Indigenous infant feeding experiences. Screening and full-text review was completed by two independent reviewers. A grey literature search was also conducted using country-specific Google searches and targeted website searching. The protocol is registered with the Open Science Framework and published in BMJ Open. RESULTS: Forty-six papers from the five databases and grey literature searches were included in the final review and extraction. There were 18 papers from Canada, 11 papers in the US, 9 studies in Australia and 8 studies conducted in Aotearoa. We identified the following themes describing infant feeding experiences through qualitative analysis: colonization, culture and traditionality, social perceptions, family, professional influences, environment, cultural safety, survivance, establishing breastfeeding, autonomy, infant feeding knowledge, and milk substitutes, with family and culture having the most influence on infant feeding experiences based on frequency of themes. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights key influencers of Indigenous caregivers' infant feeding experiences, which are often situated within complex social and environmental contexts with the role of family and culture as essential in supporting caregivers. There is a need for long-term follow-up studies that partner with communities to support sustainable policy and program changes that support infant and maternal health.
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 | 0.039 | 0.065 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.023 | 0.033 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".