Evidence gaps and research needs in current guidance on feeding children from birth to 24 months
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A United States National Academies report summarized recommendations on what and how to feed infants and young children in high-income countries from 43 eligible guideline documents. Consistency existed across many recommendations, but some differences occurred in topic areas, age groupings, and methodological approaches. Future development of guidelines on feeding of infants and young children requires new research and a rigorous evidence-based review process that is harmonized within and across countries and incorporates dissemination and implementation guidance. Novelty: New research and rigorous methods are recommended to develop future harmonized guidance on feeding of infants and young children that incorporates dissemination and implementation methods.
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 | 0.124 | 0.364 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.003 |
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".