Aim: To systematically review the evidence on the associations between breastfeeding and overweight/obesity, blood pressure, total cholesterol and type 2 diabetes.Methods: Two independent literature searches were carried out using the MEDLINE, LILACS, SCIELO and Web of Science databases. Studies restricted to infants and those without an internal comparison group were excluded. Fixed‐ and random‐effects models were used to pool the estimates.Results: Breastfed subjects were less likely to be considered obese/overweight [pooled odds ratio: 0.74 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.70; 0.78)] (n = 113). Among the 11 high‐quality studies, the association was smaller [pooled odds ratio: 0.87 (95%CI: 0.76; 0.99)]. Total cholesterol (n = 46) was independent of breastfeeding [pooled mean difference: −0.01 mmol/L (95%CI: −0.05; 0.02)]. Systolic blood pressure (n = 43) was lower among breastfed subjects [mean difference: −0.80 (95%CI: −1.17; −0.43)], but no association was observed among larger studies, and for diastolic blood pressure (n = 38) [mean difference: −0.24 (95%CI: −0.50; 0.02)]. For type 2 diabetes (n = 11), the odds ratio was lower among those subjects who had been breastfed [pooled odds ratio: 0.65 (95%CI: 0.49; 0.86)].Conclusion: Breastfeeding decreased the odds of type 2 diabetes and based on high‐quality studies, decreased by 13% the odds of overweight/obesity. No associations were found for total cholesterol or blood pressure.

Aim: This study was aimed at systematically reviewing evidence of the association between breastfeeding and performance in intelligence tests.Methods: Two independent searches were carried out using Medline, LILACS, SCIELO and Web of Science. Studies restricted to infants and those where estimates were not adjusted for stimulation or interaction at home were excluded. Fixed‐ and random‐effects models were used to pool the effect estimates, and a random‐effects regression was used to assess potential sources of heterogeneity.Results: We included 17 studies with 18 estimates of the relationship between breastfeeding and performance in intelligence tests. In a random‐effects model, breastfed subjects achieved a higher IQ [mean difference: 3.44 points (95% confidence interval: 2.30; 4.58)]. We found no evidence of publication bias. Studies that controlled for maternal IQ showed a smaller benefit from breastfeeding [mean difference 2.62 points (95% confidence interval: 1.25; 3.98)]. In the meta‐regression, none of the study characteristics explained the heterogeneity among the studies.Conclusion: Breastfeeding is related to improved performance in intelligence tests. A positive effect of breastfeeding on cognition was also observed in a randomised trial. This suggests that the association is causal.

Breastfeeding has clear short-term benefits, but its long-term consequences on human capital are yet to be established. We aimed to assess whether breastfeeding duration was associated with intelligence quotient (IQ), years of schooling, and income at the age of 30 years, in a setting where no strong social patterning of breastfeeding exists. A prospective, population-based birth cohort study of neonates was launched in 1982 in Pelotas, Brazil. Information about breastfeeding was recorded in early childhood. At 30 years of age, we studied the IQ (Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, 3rd version), educational attainment, and income of the participants. For the analyses, we used multiple linear regression with adjustment for ten confounding variables and the G-formula. From June 4, 2012, to Feb 28, 2013, of the 5914 neonates enrolled, information about IQ and breastfeeding duration was available for 3493 participants. In the crude and adjusted analyses, the durations of total breastfeeding and predominant breastfeeding (breastfeeding as the main form of nutrition with some other foods) were positively associated with IQ, educational attainment, and income. We identified dose-response associations with breastfeeding duration for IQ and educational attainment. In the confounder-adjusted analysis, participants who were breastfed for 12 months or more had higher IQ scores (difference of 3·76 points, 95% CI 2·20-5·33), more years of education (0·91 years, 0·42-1·40), and higher monthly incomes (341·0 Brazilian reals, 93·8-588·3) than did those who were breastfed for less than 1 month. The results of our mediation analysis suggested that IQ was responsible for 72% of the effect on income. Breastfeeding is associated with improved performance in intelligence tests 30 years later, and might have an important effect in real life, by increasing educational attainment and income in adulthood. Wellcome Trust, International Development Research Center (Canada), CNPq, FAPERGS, and the Brazilian Ministry of Health.

In this manuscript, we update the profile of the 1982 Pelotas Birth Cohort Study.In 1982, 5914 live births whose families lived in the urban are of Pelotas were enrolled in the cohort. In 2012–13, we tried to locate the whole original cohort; 3701 participants were interviewed who, added to the 325 known deaths, represented a follow-up rate of 68.1%. In contrast to the previous home interviews, in this wave all participants were invited to visit the research clinic to be interviewed and examined. The visit was carried out at a mean age of 30.2 years and mainly focused on four categories of outcomes: (i) mental health; (ii) body composition; (iii) precursors of complex chronic diseases; and (iv) human capital. Requests for collaboration by outside researchers are welcome.

Depressive disorders are leading contributors to burden of disease in developing countries. Research aiming to improve their diagnosis and treatment is fundamental in these settings, and psychometric tools are widely used instruments to support mental health research. Our aim is to validate and compare the psychometric properties of the Spanish versions of the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) and the Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale (ZSDS). A Spanish version of the CES-D was revised by 5 native Spanish speaking psychiatrists using as reference the English version. A locally standardized Spanish version of the ZSDS was used. These Spanish versions were administered to 70 patients with a clinical diagnosis of DSM-IV Major Depressive Episode (MDE), 63 without major depression but with clinical diagnosis of other psychiatric disorders (OPD), and 61 with no evidence of psychiatric disorders (NEP). For both scales, Cronbach's alpha (C-α) and Hierarchical McDonald Omega for polychoric variables (MD-Ω) were estimated; and receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis performed. For the CES-D and ZSDS scales, C-α was 0.93 and 0.89 respectively, while MD-Ω was 0.90 and 0.75 respectively. The area under the ROC curve in MDE+OPD was 0.83 for CES-D and 0.84 for ZSDS; and in MDE+NEP was 0.98 for CES-D and 0.96 for ZSDS. Cut-off scores (co) for the highest proportions of correctly classified (cc) individuals among MDE+OPD were ≥29 for CES-D (sensitivity (ss) = 77.1/specificity (sp) = 79.4%/(cc) = 78.2%) and ≥47 for ZSDS (ss = 85.7%/sp = 71.4%/cc = 78.9%). In the MDE+NEP, co were ≥24 for the CES-D (ss = 91.4%/sp = 96.7%/cc = 93.9%) and ≥45 for the ZSDS (ss = 91.4%/sp = 91.8%/cc = 91.6%). Spanish versions of the CES-D and ZSDS are valid instruments to detect depression in clinical settings and could be useful for both epidemiological research and primary clinical settings in settings similar as those of public hospitals in Lima, Peru.