MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2752088779 · doi:10.3399/bjgp17x692345

Viewpoint: Domperidone and breastfeeding

2017· article· en· W2752088779 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Samuel Finnikin, Lisa Finnikin

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of General Practice · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDomperidoneBreastfeedingMedicineProlactinLactationPediatricsPregnancyEndocrinologyBiologyHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditionally, the role of GPs in supporting breastfeeding has been signposting women to appropriate local resources. Is discussion of galactagogues soon to be a common consultation? Domperidone stimulates prolactin release driving milk production. Ordinarily, prolactin production is induced by effective suckling, producing a positive feedback loop, and establishing milk supply. Using galactagogues to augment milk supply is common practice in some parts of the world, including British Columbia, Canada, where one in five women who delivered at term were prescribed domperidone.1 Is domperidone an underused treatment, or are we at risk of overmedicalising infant feeding? Evidence for use of domperidone to augment lactation is not compelling. In 2015, a systematic review identified four relevant randomised controlled trials.2 These studies …

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 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)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score0.725

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of General PracticeSame topicBreastfeeding Practices and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207