MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103825640 · doi:10.1093/ije/dyt003

Cohort Profile: The Promotion of Breastfeeding Intervention Trial (PROBIT)

2013· article· en· W2103825640 on OpenAlexafffund
Rita Patel, Emily Oken, Natalia Bogdanovich, Lidia Matush, Zinaida Sevkovskaya, Beverley Chalmers, Ellen Hodnett, Konstantin Vilchuck, Michael S. Kramer, Richard M. Martin

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Epidemiology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaMinistry of Health and Long Term Care
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBreastfeedingMedicineBreastfeeding promotionRandomized controlled trialAnthropometryPediatricsBreast feedingProbitRandomizationProbit modelCohortInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The PROmotion of Breastfeeding Intervention Trial (PROBIT) is a multicentre, cluster-randomized controlled trial conducted in the Republic of Belarus, in which the experimental intervention was the promotion of increased breastfeeding duration and exclusivity, modelled on the Baby-friendly hospital initiative. Between June 1996 and December 1997, 17,046 mother-infant pairs were recruited during their postpartum hospital stay from 31 maternity hospitals, of which 16 hospitals and their affiliated polyclinics had been randomly assigned to the arm of PROBIT investigating the promotion of breastfeeding and 15 had been assigned to the control arm, in which breastfeeding practices and policies in effect at the time of randomization was continued. Of the mother-infant pairs originally recruited for the study, 16,492 (96.7%) were followed at regular intervals until the infants were 12 months of age (PROBIT I) for the outcomes of breastfeeding duration and exclusivity; gastrointestinal and respiratory infections; and atopic eczema. Subsequently, 13,889 (81.5%) of the children from these mother-infant pairs were followed-up at age 6.5 years (PROBIT II) for anthropometry, blood pressure (BP), behaviour, dental health, cognitive function, asthma and atopy outcomes, and 13,879 (81.4%) children were followed to the age of 11.5 years (PROBIT III) for anthropometry, body composition, BP, and the measurement of fasted glucose, insulin, adiponectin, insulin-like growth factor-I, and apolipoproteins. The trial registration number for Current Controlled Trials is ISRCTN37687716 and that for ClinicalTrials.gov is NCT01561612. Proposals for collaboration are welcome, and enquires about PROBIT should be made to an executive group of the study steering committee (M.S.K., R.M.M., and E.O.). More information, including information about how to access the trial data, data collection documents, and bibliography, is available at the trial website (http://www.bristol.ac.uk/social-community-medicine/projects/probit/).

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations59
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of EpidemiologySame topicBreastfeeding Practices and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207