Examining the complementarity between biomedicine and ethnomedicine in Mozambique: A qualitative research approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: In Mozambique, Exclusive Breastfeeding (EBF) emerges as a fundamental element in promoting neonatal health, lying at the intersection of health care policies and the effectiveness of their implementation in communities. Given the complexity of barriers to exclusive breastfeeding, the objective of this study was to identify the assumptions for the complementarity between biomedicine and ethnomedicine aiming to strengthen the national health system policy in the Mozambique context. Methods: A descriptive qualitative study was carried out in Mozambique. A total of 30 lactating mothers (aged 18 to 43) ; 15 health care professionals ( aged 23-57) and 9 traditional medicine practitioners (healers/elders) aged (28 to 69) participated in the study; and data was collected through in-depth semi-structured interviews. Results: The study identified that EBF emerged not only as a globally recommended nutritional practice but also as a mandatory practice with hard social and cultural beliefs. Additionally key findings showed that the practice of healers needs to be seen as a gift that goes beyond the domain and execution of biomedical technique, emphasizing the importance of relationships and symbolism in social life. Conclusion: The study findings highlight the relevance of traditional practices not only as cultural heritage but also as vital elements for understanding contemporary Mozambican society.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".