Is Being Breastfed as an Infant Associated with Adult Pulmonary Function?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Breastfeeding reduces the risk of asthma and respiratory infections in infants. Since respiratory infections are associated with reduced pulmonary function in adolescents, pulmonary function impairment may be carried into adulthood. Our aim was to determine whether a history of having been breastfed as an infant is a determinant of adult pulmonary function. METHODS: We analyzed data from a general population sample of residents of Erie and Niagara Counties between September 1995 and December 1999. We calculated forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV(1)) and forced vital capacity (FVC) prediction equations and used multiple linear regression models to study the association between having been breastfed as an infant and percentage predicted FEV(1) (FEV(1)%) and percentage predicted FVC (FVC%) after adjustment for covariates. RESULTS: Of 2305 subjects, 62% reported having been breastfed. After controlling for age, gender, weight, smoking status, pack-years of smoking, eosinophil counts and dietary factors, there was no association between having been breastfed (yes/no) and FEV(1)% or FVC% (regression coefficients 0.0049, p = 0.46 and 0.0055, p = 0.43, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: We did not find a strong or consistent association between having been breastfed as an infant and pulmonary function in adulthood.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".