A review of policies on alcohol use during pregnancy in Australia and other English-speaking countries, 2006
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The issue of alcohol use during pregnancy is controversial. It is well accepted that heavy maternal alcohol consumption during early pregnancy - either chronic daily use or binge drinking (five or more drinks per occasion) - is required for the development of fetal alcohol syndrome (FAs),(1,2) but not all children exposed to alcohol in utero will be affected to the same degree, and some will not be affected.(3) A number of factors, such as the pattern and timing of alcohol consumption, stage of fetal development, and sociobehavioural factors, such as poverty and smoking, may exacerbate the impact of alcohol.(4) Maternal nutrition, genetics and concomitant use of other drugs may also influence fetal risk. Alcohol exposure can also cause a range of alcohol-related birth defects and neurodevelopmental disorders which, collectively with FAS, comprise fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD).(5) The amount of alcohol necessary for fetal damage is unclear, and it remains debatable whether there is a threshold level below which alcohol does not harm the fetus.(6)Lack of clarity in the published literature about the relationship between low to moderate alcohol consumption and fetal harm has allowed a range of interpretations and conclusions to be drawn from the data. The way each government and professional body interprets these data is reflected in their policies, and inconsistency in policy is evident not only between, but also within, countries.In this article, we examine government policies on maternal alcohol consumption during pregnancy in seven English-speaking nations - Australia, New Zealand, Canada, South Africa, the United Kingdom, Ireland and the United States - and in Australian states and territories. Where available, policies and clinical practice guidelines of relevant medical, nursing, and non-professional organisations are also presented. This review is timely, in view of the upcoming revision of the guidelines on alcohol use in Australia by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC).Alcohol and pregnancy policies and guidelines were identified through Internet searches of the websites of the relevant jurisdictions and organisations. Where no policy could be identified, the organisation was contacted by email or telephone. This strategy was based on the assumption that, to be useful tools, policies must be publicly available and easy to access.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".