Assessing the impact of different donor milk treatments on infant health and growth: a systematic review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Donor human milk (DHM) is the first alternative if mother's own milk is unavailable or contraindicated. Much DHM research has focused on its nutritional, immunological and biochemical composition in response to various maternal variables, standard human milk banking procedures and storage protocols. The current systematic review protocol, however, aims to systematically gather and analyse existing data pertaining to the impact of these aforementioned factors on the clinical, health-related and developmental outcomes observed in infants fed with DHM. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will apply a predefined search strategy including Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Global Index Medicus, CINAHL on Ebscohost, Medline, Embase, Emcare, Pubmed, Global Health on OVID, Google Scholar, clinicaltrials.gov, the WHO International Trials Registry and Platform and the European Union/European Economic Area Clinical Trials Register. No setting, patient population, date or language restrictions will be applied. The search strategy will consist of search words on the key concepts of 'donated human milk' and 'effect on infants'. Published or unpublished primary research studies are eligible for inclusion if there is an abstract available in English. Conference proceedings, animal studies and publications with no original data will be excluded.Authors of unpublished or partially published studies will be contacted and eligible data added if provided. Risk of bias will be evaluated according to CASP using appropriate tools depending on study type (RoB 2, ROBINS-I, Newcastle Ottawa Scale). Data will be synthesised in a quantitative format describing significant results as well as presenting the results of the quality assessment of studies. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This systematic review does not require ethical approval, as we will not collect primary data. The review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and disseminated electronically and in print. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024522015.
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 | 0.066 | 0.075 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.022 | 0.016 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.017 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.064 | 0.007 |
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".