‘I’m looking for support, solidarity, and anecdotes from anyone who has been through something similar’: A content analysis of parents seeking or sharing advice on breastfeeding via Reddit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parents are increasingly turning to social media for breastfeeding-related information. Reddit, which allows users to anonymously discuss with individuals around the world, has recently increased in popularity among parents. Given breastfeeding's importance, it is imperative to examine the behaviours of information-seeking parents to ascertain what information is being sought out and shared. The purpose of this study was to explore parents' use of Reddit to seek out and share breastfeeding-related information. The Naturalistic Inquiry method was employed to explore data extracted from the breastfeeding SubReddit (i.e. a forum of a particular topic where users can post/discuss the topic; /r/breastfeeding). Via thematic analysis, four themes emerged: (1) breastfeeding-related challenges; (2) 'normal' behaviours for age/development of infant; (3) weaning; and (4) returning to work. An increased understanding of the factors involved in parents' decisions to seek support online, rather than from professionals, may provide important insights into breastfeeding support gaps.
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 | 0.014 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".