Abstract. Impact of breastfeeding on the intelligence quotient of eight-year-old children1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to determine the influence of breastfeeding on the intellectual capacity of children from a cohort in a developing country, with a control for the main confounding factors. A prospective cohort study was performed including all infants born in the hospitals of a medium-size city, and a random sample of these newborns was monitored at 30, 90, and 180 days of life, and at age 8 years. Several aspects of breastfeeding were assessed in the follow-up and, at 8 years, general intellectual capacity was assessed through the Raven's Colored Progressive Matrices test. The statistical analyses used Student's t-test, -ANOVA, and linear regression and logistics, considering p-values less than 0.05 as statistically significant associations. At age 8 years, 560 children were assessed with Raven's Colored Progressive Matrices test. The average score was 22.56 points, with a standard deviation of 5.93. The difference in the averages found between the breastfed and non-breastfed groups at six months of age was 1.33 (p = 0.008). Mother's and child's skin color, social and economic class, maternal education and smoking, and breastfeeding at six months of age (p = 0.007) were still associated with the outcome. Children that were breastfed for six months or more had better performance in the general -intellectual assessment, even after adjusting for the main confounding factors.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".