MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362590603 · doi:10.3389/fped.2023.1147566

Addressing maternal medication use during breastfeeding using clinical resources and a novel physiologically based pharmacokinetic model-derived metric: A qualitative study

2023· article· en· W4362590603 on OpenAlexafffund
Cindy Hoi Ting Yeung, Sherilyn K. D. Houle, Philip O. Anderson, Brookie M. Best, Samuel Dubinsky, Andrea N. Edginton

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Pediatrics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of Waterloo
KeywordsBreastfeedingMedicineMetric (unit)PharmacokineticsQualitative researchIntensive care medicinePediatricsPharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Breastfeeding has major benefits to the maternal-infant dyad and yet healthcare providers have expressed uncertainty about advocating breastfeeding when mothers are taking medications. The tendency for some providers to be more cautious in their advising approach is likely a consequence of limited, unfamiliar, and unreliable existing information on medication use during lactation. A novel risk metric termed the Upper Area Under the Curve Ratio (UAR) was developed to overcome existing resource shortcomings. However, the perception and use of the UAR in practice by providers is not known. The aim of this study was to understand existing resource use and potential UAR use in practice, their advantages and disadvantages, and areas of improvement for the UAR. Methods: Healthcare providers mainly practicing in California with experience advising on medication use during lactation were recruited. One-on-one semi-structured interviews that included questions on current practices when advising medication use during breastfeeding, and approaches to a given a scenario with and without information about the UAR were conducted. The Framework Method was applied for data analysis to construct themes and codes. Results: Twenty-eight providers representing multiple professions and disciplines were interviewed. Six main themes emerged: (1) Current Practice Approaches, (2) Advantages of Existing Resources, (3) Disadvantages of Existing Resources, (4) Advantages of the UAR, (5) Disadvantages of the UAR, and (6) Strategies to Improve the UAR. Overall, 108 codes were identified that illustrated theme topics ranging from a general lack of metric use to the realities of advising. A workflow describing current practice approaches connected all other themes. Almost all disadvantages of existing resources could be overcome by advantages of other resources and the UAR. Several improvements to the UAR were identified to address its shortcomings. Conclusion: Through interviews with providers who use resources to advise on medication use during breastfeeding, an improved understanding of current practice approaches and accessed resources was ascertained. Ultimately, it was found that the UAR would confer multiple benefits over existing resources, and improvements of the UAR were identified. Future work should focus on implementing the suggested recommendations to ensure optimal uptake of the UAR to improve advising practices.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.363
Threshold uncertainty score0.830

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.181
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PediatricsSame topicBreastfeeding Practices and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207