Attention-Deficit Disorder Associated with Breast-Feeding: A Brief Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most common neurodevelopmental disorders that develop in children. In the United States and Canada, the prevalence is about 6%. The causes of ADHD are not known. ADHD, like autism, occurs mainly in boys aged 3-6, and there are some thoughts that both diseases may have a common mechanism. METHODS: This study uses nutritional epidemiology linked to exclusive 6-month breast-feeding. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has reported in 2003 and 2007 extensive studies on ADHD involving several million children in 50 states. The prevalence of ADHD in each state in 2003 or 2007 was compared to the average of exclusive 6-month breast-feeding from 2001 to 2004 or 3-month exclusive breast-feeding in 2007 in each of the 50 states. Several parameters, such as premature births, low birth weight, and very low birth weight, that had previously associated with ADHD were compared to ADHD incidence. Other parameters such as obesity, infant death rate, neonatal death rate, poverty, per capita income, and the percentage of individuals enrolled in the U.S. WIC (Women, Infants, and Children) program were also compared to ADHD incidence. RESULTS: A highly significant inverse relationship of ADHD to exclusive 6-month and 3-month breast-feeding in 2007 was observed. Direct relationships were observed between premature births, low birth weight and very low birth weight, obesity, infant deaths, neonatal deaths, and ADHD. INTERPRETATION: Breast milk contains components that appear to prevent ADHD.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".