Association Between Breastfeeding Type and Duration and the Molar and Facial Characteristics of Preschoolers Aged 2 To 6 Years: A Cross-Sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To calculate the association between the type and duration of breastfeeding and the deciduous molar relationship and facial characteristics of preschoolers aged 2 to 6 years. STUDY DESIGN: This crosssectional study included 160 pre-schoolers aged 2 to 6 years old, enrolled in the 2019 academic year from 3 public schools in Data collection involved two phases. The first phase consisted in determining the facial type, anteroposterior and vertical profile, facial dimensions, and the molar relationship between primary second molars. The second phase included interviews with the parents or legal guardians. Children with exclusive breastfeeding and with mixed/artificial feeding (breastfeeding and bottle-feeding, or exclusive artificial bottle-feeding) were included. Chi-square test, t-test, multiple linear regression, and binary logistic regression tests were applied (p<0.05). RESULTS: The facial length, width, and the lower third were greater in the exclusive breastfeeding group than in the mixed/artificial feeding group (3.74mm, p=0.002; 2.06mm, p=0.047; and 2.94mm, p=0.015; respectively). In addition, children with breastfeeding for more than six months showed greater facial length, facial width and lower third (3.20mm, p=0.038; 3.68mm, p=0.006; and 3.57mm, p=0.026; respectively). The duration of exclusive breastfeeding influenced facial width, noting an increase of 3.32mm (p=0.011) if a pre-schooler had exclusive breastfeeding for more than six months. CONCLUSION: There were no significant associations between type and duration of breastfeeding and the molar terminal plane, facial type, or profile. However, facial dimensions were greater in the exclusive breastfeeding group, and when breastfeeding was longer than six months.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".