Breastfeeding by Women Living with HIV in the United States: Are the Risks Truly Manageable?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this issue of the Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society, Yusuf et al describe their intensive monitoring and treatment protocol for management of nine women living with HIV (WLHIV) infection who breastfed their 10 infants without transmitting HIV infection [1]. The women signed a consent waiver acknowledging the risks of possible breastfeeding HIV transmission; mothers and infants alike were administered combination antiretroviral therapy throughout the breastfeeding period; and both mothers and infants were intensively monitored for medication adherence and by serial plasma HIV RNA concentrations. A similar report of three WLHIV in Toronto who breastfed their infants without transmitting HIV brings the reported number of such instances in North America to 13 [2]. Some authors now postulate that clinicians should move from a position of routinely contraindicating breastfeeding by WLHIV in high-income countries (HIC) to a “risk reduction strategy” in which selected WLHIV...
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 | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| 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 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".