Factors Associated With Newborn In-Hospital Weight Loss: Comparisons by Feeding Method, Demographics, and Birthing Procedures
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Full-term newborn normative weight loss and factors influencing this were determined through chart audits (n = 812) at 6 hospitals in Manitoba, Canada. The effects of parity, gestational age, birth weight, sex, length of stay, type of delivery (cesarean vs vaginal), epidural use, and type of infant feeding (exclusively breastfed, partially breastfed, exclusively formula-fed) on percentage weight loss in hospital were analyzed using multiple regression analysis. In-hospital weight loss was 5.09% +/- 2.89% (95% CI, 4.89-5.29), varying by feeding category: exclusively breastfed 5.49% +/- 2.60% (95% CI, 5.23-5.74), partially breastfed 5.52% +/- 3.02% (95% CI, 5.16-5.88), and formula-fed 2.43% +/- 2.12% (95% CI, 2.02-2.85). Factors significantly increasing the percentage weight loss included higher birth weight, female sex, epidural use, and longer hospital stay. Lower percentage weight loss was associated with greater gestational age and exclusive formula feeding. Parity and type of delivery were not significant. Controlling for demographic and delivery-related variables, exclusive formula feeding had the largest impact, with 3.1% less weight loss than exclusive breastfeeding.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it