High levels of breastmilk feeding despite a low rate of exclusive breastfeeding for 6 months in a cohort of vulnerable women in Toronto, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) for 6 months is a global public health goal, but measuring its achievement as a marker of population breastmilk feeding practices is insufficient. Additional measures are needed to understand variation in non-EBF practices and inform intervention priorities. We collected infant feeding data prospectively at seven time points to 6 months post-partum from a cohort of vulnerable women (n = 151) registered at two Canada Prenatal Nutrition Program sites in Toronto, Canada. Four categories of breastmilk feeding intensity were defined. Descriptive analyses included the (i) proportion of participants in each feeding category by time point, (ii) use of formula and non-formula supplements to breastmilk, (iii) proportion of participants practising EBF continuously for at least 3 months; and (iv) frequency of transitions between feeding categories. All participants initiated breastmilk feeding with 70% continuing for 6 months. Only 18% practised EBF for 6 months, but 48% did so for at least 3 continuous months. The proportion in the EBF category was highest from 2 to 4 months post-partum. Supplemental formula use was highest in the first 3 months; early introduction of solids and non-formula fluids further compromised EBF at 5 and 6 months post-partum. Most participants (75%) transitioned between categories of breastmilk feeding intensity, with 35% making two or more transitions. Our data show high levels of breastmilk provision despite a low rate of EBF for 6 months. Inclusion of similar analyses in future prospective studies is recommended to provide more nuanced reporting of breastmilk feeding practices and guide intervention designs.
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) | 0.000 | 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".