Examination of breastfeeding rates and other feeding practices among US infants and toddlers: results from the NHANES 2009 – 2014
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of Part I of this research was to assess the relationship between household food insecurity and infant feeding practices, including initiation and duration of breastfeeding and introduction to solids and beverages among U.S. infants and toddlers ages 0 to 24 months. Data from 3 cycles of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (2009 – 2014) was used for this study. 2,069 infants and toddlers were included in Phase I analyses. Survey-weighted analyses revealed that the breastfeeding initiation rate was 74.4% among this population, lower than the estimated breastfeeding initiation rate by the CDC. 43.5% were introduced to other foods prior to 4 months of age. Stratified analyses revealed that lowest initiation and duration rates of breastfeeding occurred among non-Hispanic Blacks. Overall, no significant differences were observed by household food security status after controlling for covariates in multiple regression analysis. The purpose of Part II of this research was to assess the nutrient intakes of U.S. infants and toddlers ages 6 to 24 months, compare their adequacy to the Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs), and assess differences by race/ethnicity. 1,160 infants and toddlers were included in Phase II analyses. About 1/3 of infants ages 6 to 11.9 months did not meet the daily carbohydrate or total fat requirement, and about a quarter did not meet the vitamin A or iron requirements. 55.4% of infants exceeded the UL for vitamin A. Among toddlers ages 12 to 24 months, 96.6% did not meet the requirement for dietary fiber, most exceeded sodium and vitamin A, but 40.5% did not meet iron. By race/ethnicity, Hispanics were at higher risk of not meeting requirements.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".