Breastfeeding Initiation: Impact of Obesity in a Large Canadian Perinatal Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate incidence of breastfeeding initiation according to maternal pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI) in "Grossesse en Santé", a large prospective birth cohort in Quebec City. METHODS: Breastfeeding initiation in the post-partum period, pre-pregnancy BMI, sociodemographic determinants and obstetrical and neonatal factors were collected from years 2005 to 2010 in 6592 women with single pregnancies. Prenatal non-intention to breastfeed was documented in a subgroup of the cohort (years 2009-2010). Log-binomial regression analyses were performed to assess relative risk (RR) of non-initiation of breastfeeding between maternal BMI categories in models including pre- and post-natal determinants, after exclusion of variables with a mediating effect. RESULTS: Twenty percent (20%) of obese women did not initiate breastfeeding in the post-natal period at hospital compared to 12% for normal weight women. Compared with those having a normal pre-pregnancy BMI, obese women had a higher risk of non-initiation of breastfeeding (RRunadj 1.69, 95% CI 1.44-1.98), even after adjustment for prenatal and sociodemographic factors (RRadj 1.26, 95% CI 1.08-1.46). Furthermore, the risk of non-initiation of breastfeeding in obese women still remained higher after introduction of per- and post-natal factors (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.04-1.42). The prenatal non-intention to breastfeed was strongly associated with the non-initiation of breastfeeding for all categories of BMI. CONCLUSION: Maternal obesity is associated with a two-fold rate of non-initiation of breastfeeding. Considering the benefits of breastfeeding and the increasing obesity rate, adapted interventions and specialized support should target both pre- and immediate post-natal periods in this population.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".