Breastfeeding and externalising problems: a quasi-experimental design with a national cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Evidence from correlational studies supporting the benefits of breastfeeding on children's externalising problems is mixed. Quasi-experimental approaches can help in better understanding possible 'effects'. We aimed to investigate the longitudinal impact of breastfeeding on externalising problems from childhood into adolescence. Participants included ~ 5000 full-term children, from the Growing Up in Ireland Child Cohort. Externalising problems (conduct problems and hyperactivity) were assessed using both the parent and teacher versions of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire when children were age 9 and 13. Maternal reports were used to collect retrospective information on breastfeeding. Propensity score matching, and adjusting for multiple testing were used to compare the average treatment effects for children who were breastfed. Post matching results revealed statistically significant reductions in hyperactivity at age nine, using both maternal and teacher reports (difference score - 0.48, 95% CI - 0.85, - 0.11; and - 0.51, 95% CI - 0.90, - 0.12, respectively), for children who were breastfed between 6 and 12 months, but not thereafter. These effects were not maintained at age 13. Moreover, no effects of breastfeeding on conduct problems were found at any age, regardless of duration, using either maternal or teacher report. While some benefits of breastfeeding were found, compatible with a temporary modest reduction in hyperactivity, related to being breastfed for 26-50 weeks, these results must be viewed in the context of reliance of propensity score matching on observable characteristics. Additionally, our results are suggestive of a potential non-linear dose-response of breastfeeding on hyperactivity.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".