Amber jewellery: A dangerous popular trend for toddlers during their teething months and beyond
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dear Editor, We would like to draw your attention to the problematic popularity of amber teething necklaces being worn by infants and toddlers, despite their risk as a choking hazard. In our Paediatrics clinic in Eastern Canada, we have recently seen two cases of amber teething necklaces worn by infants. These cases each highlight an important issue for physicians to be aware of. Amber is an alternative health product that is often sold as a bracelet or necklace to be worn by an infant or child purportedly to reduce pain associated with teething (Fig. 1).1 Companies selling amber teething jewelry have claimed that it results in numerous benefits in addition to pain relief, such as reducing inflammation and stimulating the thyroid, despite a lack of scientific evidence.2 In addition to a lack of evidence regarding the benefits, these necklaces carry a significant risk of strangulation and choking.3, 4 In the first case, a 10-month old boy, the necklace was used as pain relief during teething. The caregiver mentioned that she would normally take the jewelry off of the child before a physician visit. This highlights the importance of bringing up the issue of teething jewelry even when the physician does not physically see the child wearing it. The second case involved a 3-year-old child who originally started wearing the amber necklace as a young infant for teething pain but continued to wear it as she got older and more mobile as a keepsake. The child refused to let the parents remove the necklace because she had grown attached to the jewelry. This practice strays from the Canadian Pediatric Society recommendations that children up to the age of 4 years should avoid wearing beaded necklaces.4 Health Canada offers a clear position statement to parents and the general public, ‘Health Canada does not recommend using necklaces to prevent or reduce teething pains’.3 They emphasise that parents or caregivers should never put necklaces around a baby or toddler's neck as they can easily catch on household items such as a high chair and strangle the child.3 The Canadian Pediatric Society and American Academy of Pediatrics have also confirmed this recommendation against the use of amber teething jewelry by encouraging parents to avoid baby necklaces as a basic preventative choking and suffocation strategy.2, 4 Amber jewelry is being used both throughout the teething phase and after the child has stopped teething, for pain relief and as a keepsake. Paediatricians and other clinicians should be aware of this popular alternative healthcare product and should provide anticipatory guidance in discouraging their use.
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 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
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".