Lactation Support Services in Level III Neonatal Intensive Care Units in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Lactation support services can improve exclusive breastfeeding rates among infants in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). There are limited data on how many NICUs offer these services. OBJECTIVE: To assess prevalence and type of lactation services provided in level III Canadian NICUs. METHODS: A nationwide comprehensive point-prevalence study was undertaken via a telephone survey of level III NICUs in Canada. Availability of lactation consultants, type of services offered, infrastructure such as centralized milk labs, private space for expressing milk, and refrigerators to store breast milk, and follow-up support programs were assessed. RESULTS: There are 31 level III NICUs in Canada. Nineteen of the 31 NICUs participated in the survey, representing a 61% response rate. Of these, 79% (n = 15) offered lactation consultant services. Most (n = 13, 68%) noted they had International Board-Certified Lactation Consultants (IBCLCs). The types of lactation services offered were either a reactive care model, a proactive care model, or a combination of both. Seven (37%) units, both with and without LCs, offered alternate lactation assistance, such as helping mothers at the bedside with breastfeeds. Several units had available infrastructure (n = 10, 53%) and offered follow-up lactation support (n = 10, 53%). CONCLUSION: Most of the surveyed level III NICUs in Canada provided lactation support services; however, there was variation in type. More research is needed to identify barriers that NICUs face in offering lactation services for mothers of NICU babies.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".