Association Between Total Duration of Breastfeeding and Iron Deficiency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether there is an association between the total breastfeeding duration and iron stores, iron deficiency, and iron deficiency anemia in healthy urban children. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of healthy children, aged 1 to 6 years, seen for primary health care between December 2008 and July 2011 was conducted through the TARGet Kids! practice-based research network. Univariate and adjusted regression analyses were used to evaluate an association between total breastfeeding duration and serum ferritin, iron deficiency, and iron deficiency anemia. RESULTS: Included were 1647 healthy children (median age 36 months) with survey, anthropometric, and laboratory data. An association was found between increasing duration of breastfeeding and lower serum ferritin (P = .0015). Adjusted logistic regression analysis revealed the odds of iron deficiency increased by 4.8% (95% confidence interval: 2%-8%) for each additional month of breastfeeding. Exploratory analysis suggested an increasing cumulative probability of iron deficiency with longer total breastfeeding duration with an adjusted odds ratio of 1.71 (95% confidence interval: 1.05-2.79) for iron deficiency in children breastfed over versus under 12 months of age. The relationship between total breastfeeding duration and iron deficiency anemia did not meet statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Increased total breastfeeding duration is associated with decreased iron stores, a clinically important association warranting additional investigation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".