MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7161994984 · doi:10.82308/21894

Global health and policy translation: women's embodied experience of breastfeeding in Quebec

2013· dissertation· en· W7161994984 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Luisa Molino

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreastfeedingFocus groupPublic healthNegotiationGlobal healthNarrativeQualitative researchHealth policy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the last few decades breastfeeding (BF) has become a World Health Organization (WHO) sanctioned public health priority due to its positive health outcomes, both for the mother and her child. In 2001, the province of Quebec issued a BF policy L'Allaitement maternel au Québec: Lignes directrices, (thereafter LD), aimed at implementing global health recommendations on infant feeding (WHO/UNICEF). Although this policy action has resulted in tremendous increase of BF initiation rate, BF duration remains below WHO standards, particularly among specific sociodemographic groups. Drawing on data from a large, multi-site qualitative study in Quebec, this study analyzes women's experience of BF, and seeks to investigate the gap between policy and its implementation, and in turn how women interpret, negotiate and/or resist current recommendations in their infant feeding practices. The focus of the study is the comparison of women's narratives (52 women participated in 11 Focus Groups) and lived experience of varying health care settings with differing degrees of compliance to LD (high and low implementation of the Baby-Friendly Initiative). This work examines BF beyond its biological dimension, and it tackles how public health policies and quality of delivery services influence women's choices and practices of infant feeding, and concur to women's experience and self-perception of motherhood and womanhood.Given that this policy evaluation study draws from women's narratives from various life contexts (rural and urban settings), my findings will contribute significantly to future BF policies in Québec as well as to give valuable insight on a global level.

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)0.002
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.455

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0220.010
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.336 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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