MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evolution of Infant and Young Child Feeding: Implications for Contemporary Public Health

2007· review· en· W2127984544 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Nutrition · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman evolutionAdaptation (eye)BiologyFlexibility (engineering)FacultativePaleoanthropologyPublic healthNiche constructionHominidaeBiological evolutionDevelopmental psychologyLactationEvolutionary biologyZoologyPsychologyEcologyMedicinePregnancyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evolutionary anthropological and ethnographic studies are used to develop a general conceptual framework for understanding prehistoric, historic, and contemporary variation in human lactation and complementary feeding patterns. Comparison of similarities and differences in human and nonhuman primate lactation biology suggests humans have evolved an unusually flexible strategy for feeding young. Several lines of indirect evidence are consistent with a hypothesis that complementary feeding evolved as a facultative strategy that provided a unique adaptation for resolving tradeoffs between maternal costs of lactation and risk of poor infant outcomes. This evolved flexibility may have been adaptive in the environments in which humans evolved, but it creates potential for mismatch between optimal and actual feeding practices in many contemporary populations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.746
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.094
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.307 · 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