Telephone-based peer support increased the duration of breast feeding in primiparous mothers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
(2002) CMAJ 166, 21; Dennis CL, Hodnett E, Gallop R, et al. . The effect of peer support on breast-feeding duration among primiparous women: a randomized controlled trial. . Jan 8; . : . –8 . [OpenUrl][1][Abstract/FREE Full Text][2] QUESTION: Do primiparous, breastfeeding mothers who receive telephone-based peer support continue breast feeding for a longer duration than women who receive conventional care? Randomised (allocation concealed*), blinded (outcome assessors),* controlled trial with follow up at 4, 8, and 12 weeks postpartum. 2 semi-urban community hospitals near Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 258 in-hospital, primiparous, breastfeeding women who were ≥16 years of age, were able to speak English, had a singleton birth at ≥37 weeks of gestation, and were accessible by a local telephone call. Exclusion criteria were factors that could seriously interfere with breast feeding (eg, serious maternal illness or infant congenital abnormality) or prenatal enrolment with the participating volunteer breast feeding organisation. 256 women (99%) completed the trial … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DCanadian%2BMedical%2BAssociation%2BJournal%26rft.stitle%253DCMAJ%26rft.issn%253D0008-4409%26rft.aulast%253DDennis%26rft.auinit1%253DC.-L.%26rft.volume%253D166%26rft.issue%253D1%26rft.spage%253D21%26rft.epage%253D28%26rft.atitle%253DThe%2Beffect%2Bof%2Bpeer%2Bsupport%2Bon%2Bbreast-feeding%2Bduration%2Bamong%2Bprimiparous%2Bwomen%253A%2Ba%2Brandomized%2Bcontrolled%2Btrial%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F11800243%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/ijlink?linkType=ABST&journalCode=cmaj&resid=166/1/21&atom=%2Febmed%2F7%2F5%2F156.atom
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Randomized trial | high |
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".