Infant feeding practices within a large electronic medical record database
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The emerging adoption of the electronic medical record (EMR) in primary care enables clinicians and researchers to efficiently examine epidemiological trends in child health, including infant feeding practices. METHODS: We completed a population-based retrospective cohort study of 8815 singleton infants born at term in Ontario, Canada, April 2002 to March 2013. Newborn records were linked to the Electronic Medical Record Administrative data Linked Database (EMRALD™), which uses patient-level information from participating family practice EMRs across Ontario. We assessed exclusive breastfeeding patterns using an automated electronic search algorithm, with manual review of EMRs when the latter was not possible. We examined the rate of breastfeeding at visits corresponding to 2, 4 and 6 months of age, as well as sociodemographic factors associated with exclusive breastfeeding. RESULTS: Of the 8815 newborns, 1044 (11.8%) lacked breastfeeding information in their EMR. Rates of exclusive breastfeeding were 39.5% at 2 months, 32.4% at 4 months and 25.1% at 6 months. At age 6 months, exclusive breastfeeding rates were highest among mothers aged ≥40 vs. < 20 years (rate ratio [RR] 2.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.62-3.68), urban vs. rural residence (RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.22-1.50), and highest vs. lowest income quintile (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.02-1.36). Overall, immigrants had similar rates of exclusive breastfeeding as non-immigrants; yet, by age 6 months, among those residing in the lowest income quintile, immigrants were more likely to exclusively breastfeed than their non-immigrant counterparts (RR 1.43, 95% CI 1.12-1.83). CONCLUSIONS: We efficiently determined rates and factors associated with exclusive breastfeeding using data from a large EMR database.
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 | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".