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
Breastfeeding is the optimal method for feeding a newborn. However, some mothers may have difficulties lactating. Domperidone is widely used as a galactagogue but to the best of our knowledge has not been approved by any health authority. The objective of this review was to assess the benefit-risk ratio of domperidone for stimulating lactation. The benefit-risk ratio of domperidone as a galactagogue was assessed following a literature search of the PubMed database up to July 2013. Four studies were selected to assess domperidone efficacy and demonstrated an increased milk production. The limited data (60 mother-baby pairs) and the moderate methodological quality of 1 study remain insufficient to conclude on domperidone efficacy. Regarding the safety of domperidone, 7 studies were selected that exposed 113 infants to domperidone through breastfeeding. No adverse effects were observed in 85 infants, and no information was provided for the remaining 28. The limited data available remain in favor of a safe domperidone profile in infants and mothers. However, in large studies focused on gastrointestinal disorders, domperidone is responsible for drug-induced long QT syndrome and sudden cardiac death. The use of domperidone as a galactagogue is worrisome as drug-induced long QT syndrome occurred mostly in women. In these circumstances, an improvement of breastfeeding practices seems to be more effective and safer than the use of an off-label domperidone treatment.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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