Why do women consume alcohol during pregnancy or while breastfeeding?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ISSUE: Alcohol consumption during pregnancy and breastfeeding cause adverse health outcomes to the mother and child, including Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD). APPROACH: Systematic literature review and thematic synthesis. Original studies that contained reasons for alcohol consumption in pregnancy and while breastfeeding were included. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) and the Confidence in the Evidence of Reviews of Qualitative Research (CerQUAL) approach were utilised. The review protocol is available on PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42018116998). KEY FINDINGS: Forty-two eligible studies comprising women from 16 countries were included. Most commonly reported reasons of alcohol use in pregnancy were societal pressure and the belief that only "strong" alcohol and alcohol in large quantities is harmful. Other reasons were: a lack of awareness of adverse effects on the fetus; coping with adverse life experiences; consumption based on intuitive decision-making and influenced by personal/peer experiences; belief in the beneficial properties of alcohol; advice from medical practitioners; unwanted or unplanned pregnancy; alcohol dependence; and consumption as a cultural/traditional custom. Reasons for alcohol use during breastfeeding included the belief that alcohol stimulates breast milk production, unclear advice from medical practitioners, unawareness of the risks of infant exposure and to improve mood and celebrate events. IMPLICATIONS: Understanding the context of reasons for alcohol use in pregnancy is crucial for implementing prenatal health education, and preventing FASD and other adverse maternal and child health outcomes. CONCLUSION: Individual beliefs, knowledge/advice, culture and personal circumstances influence alcohol use in pregnancy. Data are limited for reasons surrounding alcohol use while breastfeeding.
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 | 0.025 | 0.105 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".