MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

6th World Congress on Developmental Origins of Health and Disease

2009· article· en· W1218626 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Keith M. Godfrey, Peter D. Gluckman, Karen A. Lillycrop, Graham C. Burdge, Joanne Rodford, J.L. Slater-Jefferies, Chelsea McLean, Adam Sheppard, Sarah Crozier, Bright Starling Emerald, Catharine R. Galé, Cyrus Cooper, Mark A. Hanson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Developmental Origins of Health and Disease · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicChild and Adolescent Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of Nutrition, Metabolism and DiabetesMedical Research CouncilParthenon TrustCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthInstitute of Human Development, Child and Youth HealthWellcome TrustNational Institute on AgingUniversity of Washington
KeywordsBirth weightDemographyBirth orderIntelligence quotientMedicinePediatricsWechsler Adult Intelligence ScalePsychologyDevelopmental psychologyPregnancyPsychiatryEnvironmental healthPopulationBiologyCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To evaluate in 5 year-old Chilean children the relationship among birth weight, birth order and intelligence quotient (IQ) controlling the effect of maternal variables.Methods: In a representative sample of 250 Chilean preschool children enrolled in a state child care program 1 (birth weight .2500g), we obtained birth weight (BW) and length (BL), maternal age (MA), mother's educational level (ME) and birth order (BO) from official registries.At 5 years, children were evaluated with the Intelligence Wechsler Scale (IQ) WPPSI-R by a trained psychologist.Variables were analysed as continuous and categorical; if not normally distributed, non-parametric statistics were used; uni and multivariate analysis were done.After ethical approval by INTA 0 s ethics committee, informed consent was obtained from parents.Results: 49.6% were girls, average BW was 3,412 6 454 g, (17% >2500 to 3000 g, 71% .3000 to 4000 g, 12% .4000g; BL was 49.8 6 1.7 cm, no stunting at birth (1.6% ,2 SD HAZ, WHO 2006); IQ was 92 6 9 score, with differences by BW categories; ME (17% high, 45% middle and 36% basic); and BO (38% first, 33% second and 29% third or greater) (p , 0.001).Linear regression showed that these associations were stronger in adjusted models, BW explained 9% (R 2 ) of variability in IQ.Interaction between BW and BO was tested (p , 0.05).Conclusions: This study provides evidence that the relationship between BW and IQ score is dependent on BO and that a high BW does not condition higher IQ.We confirmed that a healthy birth weight in terms of intellectual development at 5y is 3000-4000 g.Our results suggest that in low income families, the position a child holds within his/her family plus favorable nutritional status at birth, are important to maximize mental development.In countries with high prevalence of both macrosomic and low birth weight babies interventions aimed at achieving healthy weights at birth are particularly relevant.Support: Fondecyt # 1060785 and JUNAEB.Adjusted IQ score for all BW categories of and BO are shown in Fig 1. Firstborn children in all categories showed higher IQ scores.In children with high BW (.4000 g), the BO effect on IQ was stronger than that of BW.Several studies have shown that BO represents the social position of the child within the family, as confirmed by our results 2,3 .BW of 3000 to 4000 g showed the lowest IQ differences among categories of BO, for this BW group average IQ was closest to the expected mean normal (>100 IQ).Children of lower BW (,3000 g) showed no consistent relationship between IQ and BO.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.259

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0780.025

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.336 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations7
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Developmental Origins of Health and DiseaseSame topicChild and Adolescent HealthFrench-language works237,207