Breastfeeding among Women with Rheumatoid Arthritis Compared with the General Population: Results from a Nationwide Prospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The World Health Organization recommends that infants be exclusively breastfed until the age of 6 months. The first objective was to compare breastfeeding frequencies and time of cessation between women with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and the general population. The second objective was to identify why patients with RA discontinue breastfeeding. METHODS: This study was embedded in the Pregnancy-induced Amelioration of Rheumatoid Arthritis (PARA) study, a nationwide prospective cohort study. From 2002 to 2008, a total of 249 pregnancies were followed from pregnancy until 6 months postpartum. Data on lactation and medication use were collected. Proportion tests were used to compare percentages of breastfeeding between the study population and the general/reference population. RESULTS: At 4-6, 12, and 26 weeks postpartum, 43%, 26%, and 9% of the RA patients breastfed their offspring, respectively, compared with 63%, 46%, and 41% in the general population, respectively (p < 0.001). The main reason for women to discontinue breastfeeding was the restart of medication (n = 129, 57.8%). Nevertheless, more than 40% of these patients restarted medication that was considered compatible with breastfeeding. CONCLUSION: This large prospective study demonstrates that RA is associated with lower proportions of women breastfeeding their offspring and earlier cessation compared with the general population. A considerable number of patients discontinued breastfeeding so that they could start medication, even though many of the medications are considered safe to use during lactation. Using the results of this study, intervention strategies supporting RA patients who wish to breastfeed may be developed.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".