MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2321763795 · doi:10.1155/2006/801563

Maternal Infectious Diseases, Antimicrobial Therapy or Immunizations: Very few Contraindications to Breastfeeding

2006· article· en· W2321763795 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Noni E. MacDonald

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Infectious Diseases and Medical Microbiology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsIzaak Walton Killam Health Centre
FundersIWK Health CentreBritish Columbia Centre for Disease ControlHospital for Sick ChildrenBC Children's HospitalHealth CanadaCenters for Disease Control and PreventionUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsMedicineBreastfeedingAntimicrobialPediatricsIntensive care medicineMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Paediatric Society recommends exclusive breastfeeding as the optimal method of infant feeding for the first six months of life for healthy, term infants (1). There are many benefits associated with breastfeeding, including nutritional, immunological, psychological, developmental, environmental, social, economic and health (eg, decrease in infectious diseases) (2‐4). To promote, protect and support breastfeeding, every effort must be made to minimize contraindications to breastfeeding, particularly unnecessary ones. The present article summarizes the maternal infectious diseases in which continuing breastfeeding is recommended, the very few infectious diseases in which it is not recommended, the rare instances in which maternal antimicrobial therapy indicates a caution for breastfeeding, and the continuation of breastfeeding when a mother or her infant is receiving a routine recommended immunization.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations9
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Infectious Diseases and Medical MicrobiologySame topicBreastfeeding Practices and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207