Breastfeeding and obesity at 14 years: A cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To determine the influence of breastfeeding on overweight and obesity in early adolescence. METHODS: Data about breastfeeding duration, BMI of children at 14 years, and confounding variables, were collected from an ongoing longitudinal study of a birth cohort of 7776 children in Brisbane. Prevalence of overweight and obesity at 14 years was assessed according to duration of breastfeeding, with logistic regression being used to adjust for the influence of confounders. RESULTS: Data were available for 3698 children, and those not included were significantly different in age, educational level, income, race, birthweight, and small-for-gestational-age status. Breastfeeding for longer than six months was protective of obesity (OR 0.6, 95% CI 0.4, 0.96) though not of overweight. When confounding variables were considered the effect size diminished and lost statistical significance OR 0.8 (95% CI 0.5, 1.3). Breastfeeding for less than 6 months had no effect on either obesity or overweight though a trend was found for increased prevalence of overweight at 14 years with shorter periods of breastfeeding. CONCLUSION: This investigation contributes to the gathering body of evidence that breastfeeding for longer than 6 months has a modest protective effect against obesity in adolescence.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".