MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386508012 · doi:10.1159/000534004

Role of Pediatricians in Promoting and Supporting Breastfeeding: A Position Paper of the International Pediatric Association Strategic Advisory Group on Infant, Child, and Adolescent Nutrition

2023· review· en· W4386508012 on OpenAlexaff
Mary Fewtrell, Robert Bandsma, Louise A. Baur, Christopher Duggan, Oraporn Dumrongwongsiri, Iva Hojsak, Katayoun Khatami, Berthold Koletzko, Irina Kovalskys, Zhenghong Li, Nezha Mouane, Etienne Nel, Harshpal Singh Sachdev, José Vicente Spolidoro

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Nutrition and Metabolism · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreastfeedingMedicineFamily medicinePublic healthNursingBreast feedingIntervention (counseling)PediatricsEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Promoting and supporting breastfeeding is an important public health intervention with multiple benefits for both infants and mothers. Even modest increases in the prevalence and duration of breastfeeding could significantly reduce healthcare costs and improve maternal and child health outcomes. However, widespread adoption of breastfeeding recommendations remains poor in most settings, which contributes to widening health and social inequalities. Pediatricians have a duty to advocate for improving child health, including promoting and supporting breastfeeding. SUMMARY: This paper, from the International Pediatric Association Special Advisory Group on Nutrition, considers common barriers to breastfeeding and addresses how pediatricians can better promote and support breastfeeding, both at an individual level and by influencing practice and policy. All pediatricians need to understand the basics of breastfeeding, including lactation physiology, recognize common breastfeeding problems, and advise mothers or refer them for appropriate support; training curricula for general pediatricians and all pediatric subspecialties should reflect this. Even in the situation where their day-to-day work does not involve direct contact with mothers and infants, pediatricians can have an important influence on policy and practice. They should support colleagues who work directly with mothers and infants, ensuring that systems and environments are conducive to breastfeeding and, where appropriate, milk expression. Pediatricians and pediatric organizations should also promote policies aimed at promoting and supporting breastfeeding at local, regional, national, and international levels. KEY MESSAGES: Pediatricians have a duty to promote and support breastfeeding, regardless of their day-to-day role and responsibilities. Pediatric training curricula should ensure that all trainees acquire a good understanding of breastfeeding so they are able to effectively support mothers in their personal practice but also influence breastfeeding practice and policy at a local, regional, national, and international level.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.058
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.307

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0580.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.004
Scholarly communication0.0120.008
Open science0.0060.008
Research integrity0.0300.046
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.005

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Nutrition and MetabolismSame topicBreastfeeding Practices and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207