MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965864857 · doi:10.14740/ijcp201w

Current Status of the Nutritional Guidance of Baby to Human T-Cell Leukemia/Lymphoma Virus Type I Carriers by Japanese Obstetricians

2015· article· en· W1965864857 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shunji Suzuki, Masanobu Tanaka, Katsuyuki Kinoshita

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Clinical Pediatrics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicT-cell and Retrovirus Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLymphomaLeukemiaCurrent (fluid)VirusVirologyImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In humans, breast-feeding is the major route for mother-tochild transmission of human T-cell leukemia/lymphoma virus type I (HTLV-I). HTLV-I transmission by breast milk is associated with ingestion of infected cells and can be prevented by formula-feeding [1]. Therefore, in most of the developed world, mothers with a proven HTLV-I infection should be advised not to breast-feed their babies. In our recent observation in Japan, the number of HTLV-1 carrier in Japanese pregnant women has been estimated to be 1,620 (0.16% of all pregnant women) per year [2]. Based on the guidelines for obstetrical practice in Japan, the HTLV-1 carrier should be recommended to be instructed in the following methods as alternatives to breast-feeding for the prevention of HTLV-1 vertical transmission: 1) formula feeding, 2) frozen-thawed breast milk and 3) short-term breast-feeding within the first 3 months after birth [3]. However, the current status of the nutritional guidance of baby to HTLV-1 carriers by Japanese obstetricians has not been well examined. To examine the current status of mother-to-child transmission of HTLV-I preventing in Japan, on December 2014, we requested 2,544 obstetricians that are members of Japan Association of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (JAOG) and directors of each obstetric facility to provide information of the strategies. Of the 2,544 obstetricians, 1,345 (52.9%) responded. In cases of pregnant woman with positive western blot (WB) test, 953 (70.9%) of the Japanese obstetricians perform the informed choice of the three methods described above, 337 (25.1%) recommend formula feeding, and six (0.4%) recommend long-term breast milk, respectively. In Japan, because the mother-to-child transmission rates under the above three methods have been reported to be both about 3% [4, 5], about 70% of Japanese obstetricians perform the informed choice of the three methods as alternatives to breast-feeding. Breastfeeding is beneficial to the health of both the infant and mother, and mothers generally believe this. Therefore, it is possible that many of the HTLV-I-carrier mothers want to choose breastfeeding as the method of feeding their infants. However, the ground studies for the transmission rates with frozen-thawed breast milk and short-term breast-feeding have not been large (n = 64 and 162 in cases of frozen-thawed breast milk and short-term breast-feeding, respectively) [4]. Therefore, we have not yet evaluated the utility of these methods precisely. It is necessary to clarify the issues by follow-up of all cases prospectively. On the other hand, it has been described that the diagnosis of HTLV-1 carriers in their children is possible at the age of ≥ 3. However, only 698 obstetricians (55.4%) of them recommend the HTLV-1 screening tests for the children of women with positive WB test when they become ≥ 3 years old. The HTLV-1 screening tests might fraught with problems of announcements and personal information; however, the results are possible to facilitate the future diagnosis of adult T-cell leukemia and HTLV-1 associated myelopathy. Therefore, it seems to be necessary to convey to the mothers about the diagnostic methods of the HTLV-1 carriers of their children. These problems will be expected to be elucidated by a nationwide prospective cohort study.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.373
Threshold uncertainty score0.390

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Clinical PediatricsSame topicT-cell and Retrovirus StudiesFrench-language works237,207