Examining psychosocial pathways to explain the link between breastfeeding practices and child behaviour in a longitudinal cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Breastfeeding is associated with reduced postpartum depression, stronger parent-child relationships, and fewer behavioral disorders in early childhood. We tested the mediating roles of postpartum depression and parent-child relationship in the association between breastfeeding practices and child behavior. STUDY DESIGN: We used standardized questionnaire data from a subset of the CHILD Cohort Study (n = 1,573) to measure postpartum depression at 6 months, 1 year and 2 years, parent-child relationship 1 year and 2 years, and child behavior at 5 years using the Child Behavior Checklist (range 0-100). Breastfeeding practices were measured at 3 months (none, partial, some expressed, all direct at the breast), 6 months (none, partial, exclusive), 12 months, and 24 months (no, yes). Confounders included birth factors, maternal characteristics, and socioeconomic status. RESULTS: Breast milk feeding at 3 or 6 months was associated with - 1.13 (95% CI: -2.19-0.07) to -2.14 (95% CI: -3.46, -0.81) lower (better) child behavior scores. Reduced postpartum depression at 6 months mediated between 11.5% and 16.6% of the relationship between exclusive breast milk feeding at 3 months and better child behavior scores. Together, reduced postpartum depression at 1 year and reduced parent-child dysfunction at 2 years mediated between 21.9% and 32.1% of the relationship between breastfeeding at 12 months and better child behavior scores. CONCLUSION: Postpartum depression and parent-child relationship quality partially mediate the relationship between breastfeeding practices and child behavior. Breastfeeding, as well as efforts to support parental mental health and parent-child relationships, may help to improve child behavior.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".