Biracial couples and adverse birth outcomes: a systematic review and meta‐analyses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Differences in birth outcomes such as low birthweight (LBW), preterm births (PTB), stillbirth, differences in birthweight in Black vs. White race are well known. Infants born to biracial parents (mother and father from either Black or White races) also experience higher adverse birth outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review and meta-analyze birth outcomes among parents of mixed racial background compared to parents of same race. SEARCH STRATEGY: Medline, Embase, CINAHL and bibliographies of identified articles were searched for English language studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies reporting association between parental mixed racial status and LBW, PTB, or small-for-gestational age (SGA) outcomes were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSES: After exclusion of duplicate cohorts in different publications, data from White mother-Black father (WMBF), Black mother-White father (BMWF) and Black mother-Black father (BMBF) groups were compared with the White mother-White father (WMWF) group. RESULTS: Eight English language studies from of 26 335 596 singleton births were included and reviewed. Compared to the WMWF group, the adjusted odds ratio (95% confidence intervals) were: (a) low birthweight; 1.21 (1.10-1.33) for WMBF, 1.75(1.64-1.87) for BMWF, and 2.08 (1.81-2.38) for BMBF; (b) preterm births; 1.17 (1.05-1.31) for WMBF, 1.37 (1.18-1.59) for BMWF, and 1.78 (1.59-2.00) for BMBF; and (c) stillbirths; 1.43 (0.92-2.21) for WMBF, 1.51 (1.09-2.08) for BMWF, and 1.85 (1.47-2.32) for BMBF. CONCLUSION: Biracial status of parents was associated with higher risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes than both White parents but lower than both Black parents, with maternal race having a greater influence than paternal race on pregnancy outcomes.
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 | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".