Breast-feeding duration for the prevention of excess body weight of mother–child pairs concurrently: a 2-year cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between breast-feeding duration and the risk of excess body weight (children >85th percentile, mothers BMI≥25·0 kg/m2) concurrently in mother-child pairs two years after delivery. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study in Joinville, Brazil. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the independent relationship between breast-feeding duration and risk of excess body weight. SETTING: Brazilian public maternity hospital. SUBJECTS: Three hundred and five mother-child pairs. RESULTS: At 2-year follow-up, 23·6 % of mother-child pairs had excess body weight. Children breast-fed for <2 months were more likely to have excess body weight than children breast-fed for ≥6 months (OR=2·4; 95 % CI 1·1, 5·1). Breast-feeding for <2 months was also associated with a greater likelihood of maternal excess body weight compared with those who breast-fed for ≥6 months (OR=2·9; 95 % CI 1·1, 8·1). There was a progressive increase in the likelihood of mother-child pairs having excess body weight as breast-feeding duration decreased. In addition to breast-feeding duration, other independent determinants of excess body weight were pre-pregnancy weight, gestational weight gain and number of pregnancies in mothers, and birth weight in children. CONCLUSIONS: Breast-feeding for a longer duration has a parallel protective effect on the risk of excess body weight in mother-child pairs two years after birth. Since members of the same family could be influenced by the same risk factors, continued promotion and support of breast-feeding may help to attenuate the rising prevalence of overweight in mother-child pairs.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".