Impact of Flood on Breastfeeding Practices at Flood Relief Camps of Pakistan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To explore impact of flood on breastfeeding practices and identify barriers in continuation of breastfeeding among mothers residing in flood relief camps. Methods: This exploratory observational study was conducted during visit of medical team of The University of Child Health Sciences, Children’s Hospital at flood relief camps of Sindh (7th September to 12th September, 2022) and south-west of Punjab province (18th November to 20th November, 2022). The data was collected on structured questionnaire from 40 lactating mothers residing in flood relief camps. Purposive sampling technique was used in this regard. Results: The mean age of breastfed children was 16.1±7.811 months. There was negative impact on breastfeeding practices (n=21, 52.5%) as frequency decreased in 18(45%) mothers and 3(7.5%) totally stopped breastfeeding. There was significant relation between pre-flood breastfeeding status and impact of flood on breastfeeding practices (p=0.001). The major barriers to appropriate breastfeeding were mother’s perception of insufficient breast milk due to inadequate diet (n=6, 15%) or depression and anxiety (n=4, 10%), mother’s illness (n=3, 7.5%), constant displacement (n=2, 5%) and provision of breast milk substitutes (n=2, 5%). Conclusion: There has been significant negative impact of flood on breastfeeding practices among lactating mothers residing in flood relief camps. Perception of decreased milk production due to inadequate diet and stress are major barriers in continuation of breastfeeding. Breastfeeding supportive services need to be integral component of flood crisis management. doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.40.8.8488 How to cite this: Rizwan W, Sadiq M, Bukhari MH, Tasneem M. Impact of Flood on Breastfeeding Practices at Flood Relief Camps of Pakistan. Pak J Med Sci. 2024;40(8):1724-1728. doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.40.8.8488 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".