Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the important time of weaning, improper practices sometime leads to health issues in infants especially in the developing countries like, India. This article summarizes various recommendations about weaning. Mayo’s Clinic and The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommends exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months after birth and breastfeeding in combination with solid foods, until at least age 1. Infant and Young Child Feeding Guidelines: 2010 recommends even after six months of age breastfeeding should be actively supported and complementary food should be added instead of completely weaning from the breastfeeding. Canadian Task Force says; to introduce iron fortified infant cereal as the first solid food by six months of age to avoid iron deficiency, while trying weaning an expert consultation should be taken. Weaning may be either planned (mother-led) or natural (infant-led). Occasionally, there is a need for abrupt or emergency weaning, such as in the case of a prolonged unplanned separation of the mother and infant or severe maternal illness. Use of pacifiers may led to early weaning. Studies found no evidence to suggest that breastfeeding or its duration are independent risk factors for early childhood caries, severe early childhood caries or decayed and filled surfaces on the primary teeth. Keywords: Weaning, pacifier, caries, breastfeeding, health issues Cite this Article A.S. Rathore, N.H. Joshi, A. Deshpande . Various Aspects of Weaning. Research and Reviews: Journal of Medical Science and Technology. 2016; 5(1): 13–16p.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".