Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Breastfeeding: A Narrative Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) frequently affects women of childbearing age who may consider breastfeeding. Although breastfeeding has numerous benefits, there remain concerns regarding the safety of breastfeeding among women with IBD. Breastfeeding is important in developing the immune system of infants and has been shown to protect against the development of IBD. The risk of developing an increase in disease activity postpartum is the same regardless of breastfeeding status. Most IBD medications are also considered safe in breastfeeding and have no major risks to infants. Despite this, breastfeeding rates remain low among women with IBD, mostly due to concerns about the safety of IBD therapy with breastfeeding. Many women self-discontinue their IBD medications to breastfeed, and there is often uncertainty among health professionals to make recommendations about therapy. Dedicated IBD clinics can greatly support mothers during pregnancy and breastfeeding periods to enhance their knowledge, optimize their medication adherence, and improve their postpartum outcomes. This review aims to provide the most recent evidence-based literature regarding the safety of breastfeeding in women with IBD and the current recommendations about medical therapies with breastfeeding.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".