MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024698696 · doi:10.1186/1471-2431-14-216

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the nutrient content of preterm and term breast milk

2014· review· en· W2024698696 on OpenAlexaff
Dominica Gidrewicz, Tanis R. Fenton

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Pediatrics · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicInfant Nutrition and Health
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of CalgaryAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLactoseBreast milkMedicineColostrumLactationGestational ageAnimal scienceCaseinComposition (language)PregnancyFood sciencePhysiologyBiologyImmunologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Breast milk nutrient content varies with prematurity and postnatal age. Our aims were to conduct a meta-analysis of preterm and term breast milk nutrient content (energy, protein, lactose, oligosaccharides, fat, calcium, and phosphorus); and to assess the influence of gestational and postnatal age. Additionally we assessed for differences by laboratory methods for: energy (measured vs. calculated estimates) and protein (true protein measurement vs. the total nitrogen estimates). METHODS: Systematic review results were summarized graphically to illustrate the changes in composition over time for term and preterm milk. Since breast milk fat content varies within feeds and diurnally, to obtain accurate estimates we limited the meta-analyses for fat and energy to 24-hour breast milk collections. RESULTS: Forty-one studies met the inclusion criteria: 26 (843 mothers) preterm studies and 30 (2299 mothers) term studies of breast milk composition. Preterm milk was higher in true protein than term milk, with differences up to 35% (0.7 g/dL) in colostrum, however, after postnatal day 3, most of the differences in true protein between preterm and term milk were within 0.2 g/dL, and the week 10-12 estimates suggested that term milk may be the same as preterm milk by that age. Colostrum was higher than mature milk for protein, and lower than mature milk for energy, fat and lactose for both preterm and term milk. Breast milk composition was relatively stable between 2 and 12 weeks. With milk maturation, there was a narrowing of the protein variance. Energy estimates differed whether measured or calculated, from -9 to 13%; true protein measurement vs. the total nitrogen estimates differed by 1 to 37%. CONCLUSIONS: Although breast milk is highly variable between individuals, postnatal age and gestational stage (preterm versus term) were found to be important predictors of breast milk content. Energy content of breast milk calculated from the macronutrients provides poor estimates of measured energy, and protein estimated from the nitrogen over-estimates the protein milk content. When breast milk energy, macronutrient and mineral content cannot be directly measured the average values from these meta-analyses may provide useful estimates of mother's milk energy and nutrient content.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.052
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.102

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.052
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0230.035
Bibliometrics0.0100.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations548
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC PediatricsSame topicInfant Nutrition and HealthFrench-language works237,207