The association between maternal body mass index and breast milk composition: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Breast milk composition is influenced by many factors, ranging from maternal nutritional status to infant sex. Previous studies have explored the relationship between maternal body mass index (BMI) and breast milk composition; however, the findings have been inconsistent and controversial. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the evidence on the association of maternal weight and BMI with breast milk composition. DATA SOURCES: The PubMed and Scopus databases were searched up to May 3, 2023, using the following search strategy: ("maternal weight" OR "maternal BMI" OR "mother's weight" OR "mother's BMI") AND ("maternal milk" OR "human milk" OR "breast milk"). DATA EXTRACTION: A total of 83 publications, involving data from more than 11 310 lactating women, were identified. All extracted data were compiled, compared, and critically analyzed. DATA ANALYSIS: Overall, maternal BMI was associated with higher levels of leptin and insulin, and the ratio of omega-6 to omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids in breast milk. However, no conclusive associations were found between maternal BMI and the levels of energy, macronutrients, micronutrients, and other components of breast milk. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review provides robust evidence supporting a positive correlation between maternal BMI and breast milk concentrations of leptin, insulin, and the omega-6 to omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid ratio. Nevertheless, disparities in findings are noticeable for other constituents of breast milk. To comprehensively grasp the influence of maternal weight and BMI on breast milk composition, further research endeavors are imperative. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration no. CRD42023458667.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".