Impact of breast-feeding on psychomotor and neuropsychological development in children of diabetic mothers: role of the late neonatal period
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Previous data from our Kaulsdorf Cohort Study (KCS) suggest that early neonatal ingestion (1st week) of breast milk from diabetic mothers (diabetic breast milk, DBM) may increase the risk of being overweight and delay speech development in offspring of diabetic mothers (ODM). Late neonatal DBM ingestion (2nd-4th week), however, not independently influenced the risk of overweight. We investigated whether late neonatal DBM ingestion might independently influence neuro-development. METHODS: Achievement of developmental milestones according to late neonatal DBM intake was analyzed in 242 ODM. RESULTS: No impact of DBM ingestion on psychomotor parameters was observed. In contrast, it negatively influenced onset of speaking (no DBM: median 44.0 weeks, range 31.0-72.0; some DBM: 48.0, 24.0-100.0; DBM only: 52.0, 28.0-84.0; P=0.037) and halved the probability of reaching this milestone at any time point (hazard ratio: 0.53, 95% confidence interval: 0.31-0.91). However, adjustment for DBM volume ingested during the early neonatal period weakened the hazard ratio towards non-significance. In the fully adjusted model, the hazard ratio was halved, but insignificant. CONCLUSIONS: Our results underscore that neonatal DBM ingestion, particularly during the first week of life, may delay speech development, an important indicator of cognitive development. Further studies are urgently recommended on consequences of breast-feeding for neurodevelopment in ODM.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".