MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4413121814 · doi:10.1101/2025.08.05.25333056

Lactation consultant support for breastfeeding people with HIV: HIV-knowledge, attitudes, stigma, and tele-lactation experiences in the United States and Canada

2025· preprint· en· W4413121814 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Emily Barr, Lisa Abuogi, Mary Lingwall, Qian Qian, L Cunningham Anthony, Joanna Vennekotter, Hulin Wu, Rebecca Tsusaki, Jennifer McKinney

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Texas Health Science Center at Houston
KeywordsBreastfeedingStigma (botany)MedicineQualitative researchNursingCLARITYFamily medicinePsychologyPediatricsPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background As infant feeding guidelines in the United States evolve to include shared decision-making approaches for pregnant and postpartum people with HIV (PP-PWH), lactation consultants (LCs) play an increasingly critical role in providing informed, compassionate support for breastfeeding/chestfeeding. However, limited knowledge and persistent stigma may hinder their preparedness and willingness to support PP-PWH in achieving their feeding goals. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional mixed-methods survey among 207 certified LCs in the United States and Canada. Quantitative data assessed HIV-related knowledge, stigma, and willingness to support breastfeeding in PP-PWH using adapted and validated instruments. Qualitative data from open-ended responses were thematically analyzed using the Health Stigma and Discrimination Framework. Results Participants demonstrated high general HIV knowledge (Mean = 9.29/10) but only moderate HIV breastfeeding knowledge (Mean = 10.8/21). Those with recent experience supporting PP-PWH in breastfeeding had significantly higher HIV breastfeeding knowledge (p < 0.001). Stigma levels were generally low, but stigma was significantly associated with more restrictive attitudes toward breastfeeding (p < 0.001). Qualitative findings revealed that LC willingness to support PP-PWH was shaped by perceived risks, personal comfort levels, professional ethics, understanding of transmission prevention, and systemic supports. Many emphasized respect for parental autonomy, nonjudgmental care, and the need for updated education and policy clarity. Conclusion LCs are motivated to support PP-PWH but face knowledge gaps and institutional barriers that must be addressed. Integrating targeted education, stigma reduction strategies, and peer-supported tele-lactation models may enhance LC confidence and improve equitable, person-centered care for families affected by HIV.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.211

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences→French-language works237,207→