MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Impact of maternal infection and breast inflammation on infant growth in Guatemala

2016· article· en· W4389025340 on OpenAlexaffabout
Hilary Wren, Andréanne Leblanc, Chen Li, Noel W. Solomons, Marilyn E. Scott, Kristine G. Koski

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLactationMedicineBreast milkBreast feedingSubclinical infectionPhysiologyInternal medicinePregnancyBiologyPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background It is well known that certain maternal infections impair infant growth. Less clear is whether subclinical asymptomatic breast inflammation during the first six months of lactation will also retard infant growth. During subclinical mastitis, a common inflammatory condition of the lactating breast, tight epithelial junctions become “leaky” allowing for movement of sodium and potassium, pro‐inflammatory cytokines, and growth factors into milk via the paracellular pathway. The objectives of this longitudinal study were to: (1) to explore the consequences of maternal infection on infant weight‐for‐age (WAZ), length‐for‐age (LAZ) and head‐circumference‐for‐age (HCZ) at two stages of lactation; (2) and to investigate the relative contribution of milk pro‐inflammatory cytokines and growth factors to infant anthropometry. Methods Breast milk samples were collected from a cohort of lactating Mam ‐Mayan mothers during early (0–6 wks, n=134) and established lactation (4–6 mo, n=120). Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry measured milk Na and K. Luminex measured milk pro‐inflammatory cytokines (IL‐1, IL‐6, IL‐8, TNF‐a) and growth factors (EGF, VEGF). Analysis for presence of maternal urine leukocytes and direct smear of maternal stool samples for non‐pathogenic protozoa ( Blastocystis hominis, Entamoeba coli , Iodamoeba butschli and Endolimax nana ) were measured. Independent variables for breast leakiness (Na/K ratio), breast inflammation, maternal infection and growth factors in milk were explored in separate multiple linear regression models for LAZ, WAZ and HCZ in early and in established lactation. Results Breast leakiness, as measured by a higher Na/K ratio, was positively correlated with all pro‐inflammatory cytokines in early lactation but in established lactation, only milk IL‐6 was positively correlated with Na/K ratio. In early lactation, LAZ was positively associated with maternal height and urine leukocytes. WAZ was positively associated with maternal weight and negatively with milk Na/K ratio and maternal stool Blastocystis hominis. HCZ was also negatively associated with milk Na/K ratio and maternal stool Blastocystis hominis but positively with the pro‐inflammatory cytokine IL‐6 in milk. In established lactation, LAZ was positively associated with maternal height but negatively with maternal stool Entamoeba coli and EGF in milk. WAZ was also negatively associated with maternal stool Entamoeba coli and positively with maternal weight and milk pro‐inflammatory cytokine TFN‐a. HCZ was positively associated with maternal height and the milk pro‐inflammatory cytokine IL‐6 but negatively with EGF in milk. Conclusion Our integrative approach shows that non‐pathogenic protozoa in maternal stool and breast leakiness contribute to poor infant growth. However, in contrast to our expectation that pro‐inflammatory cytokines in milk would retard infant growth and that growth factors would promote infant growth, we observed the opposite to be true which suggests a more complex interrelationship among maternal infection, breast inflammation and infant growth than previously understood. Support or Funding Information McGill University, School of Dietetics and Human Nutrition GREAT award;McGill University, Institute of Parasitology and Centre for Host‐Parasite Interaction Bridging Funds

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.233
Threshold uncertainty score0.463

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences→French-language works237,207→