MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Hospital Formula Supplementation Postbreastfeeding Initiation, Neighborhood Economy, and Race

2025· article· en· W7117454698 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alison Mildon, Gillian D. Alton, Jo-Anna B. Baxter, Bronwyn Underhill, Daniel Sellen, DL O’Connor

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Pediatrics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreastfeeding Practices and Influences
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenRegent Park Community Health CentreChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreastfeedingSocioeconomic statusRace (biology)Formula feedingMEDLINEAfrican americanPopulationRacial group

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: Breastfeeding supports lifelong health, but socioeconomic and racial disparities persist. Biases in hospital formula supplementation practices may be an underlying contributor. Objective: To examine whether nonmedically indicated hospital formula supplementation of term-born breastfed newborns is associated with neighborhood socioeconomic status and/or maternal race. Design, Setting, and Participants: Provincial registry data were used to build a cohort of all live births of term-born singleton infants who initiated breastfeeding in Ontario, Canada, hospitals from April 1, 2015 through March 31, 2021, and for whom prenatal screening data were available. Of 570 936 eligible births, 148 888 were excluded, primarily due to missing outcome data, preterm birth, or not initiating breastfeeding. These data were analyzed from December 2023 through October 2025. Exposures: The 2 exposures were socioeconomic status, derived by linking maternal postal codes with 2021 Ontario Marginalization Index neighborhood-level quintiles for material resources, and maternal race (Asian, Black, White, or other [Indigenous, multiracial, or unknown race]), determined from prenatal screening data. Main Outcome and Measure: The primary outcome was nonmedically indicated formula supplementation, determined from hospital feeding records. Results: This cohort included 422 048 maternal-infant dyads, 28% of whom were in the Asian racial group, 7% in the Black racial group, 59% in the White racial group, and 5% in the other racial group. Overall, 27% of infants received nonmedically indicated formula supplementation, with an increase from 23% to 32% over the study period. Participants in the Asian, Black, and other racial groups were more likely than those in the White group to be in the most marginalized socioeconomic quintile (20%, 43%, and 23% vs 16%). Risk of nonmedically indicated formula supplementation increased in a gradient across quintiles of increasing socioeconomic marginalization (quintile 5 vs quintile 1: adjusted relative risk [aRR], 1.68; 95% CI, 1.64-1.72) and was significantly elevated for the Asian (aRR, 2.69; 95% CI, 2.64-2.74), Black (aRR, 2.07; 95% CI, 2.01-2.13), and other (aRR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.39-1.48) racial groups compared with the White group. Conclusions and Relevance: In this population-level analysis, nonmedically indicated formula supplementation prevalence was high and increased over time, with elevated risk associated with socioeconomic marginalization and maternal racialization. Increased hospital adherence to breastfeeding support guidelines is needed to improve health equity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.226
Threshold uncertainty score0.502

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA PediatricsSame topicBreastfeeding Practices and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207