MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1900044360 · doi:10.1002/jcph.616

Folic acid supplementation for pregnant women and those planning pregnancy: 2015 update

2015· review· en· W1900044360 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Clinical Pharmacology · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFolate and B Vitamins Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaCanadian College of Naturopathic MedicineHospital for Sick ChildrenSickKids FoundationUniversity of TorontoWestern UniversityMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFolic acidMedicineFortificationPregnancyFolic acid supplementationFood fortificationFamily planningPopulationEnvironmental healthFood scienceInternal medicineChemistryResearch methodologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the last decade critical new information has been published pertaining to folic acid supplementation in the prevention of neural tube defects (NTDs) and other folic acid-sensitive congenital malformations. These new data have important implications for women, their families, and health care professionals. We performed a review looking for the optimal dosage of folic acid that should be given to women of reproductive age who are planning or not avoiding conception to propose updated guidelines and thus help health care providers and patients. In addition to fortification of dietary staples with folic acid, women of reproductive age should supplement before conception with 0.4-1.0 mg of folic acid daily as part of their multivitamins. In the United States all enriched rice is also fortified with folic acid at 0.7 mg per pound of raw rice. However, this is not the case in many countries, and it has been estimated that only 1% of industrially milled rice is fortified with folic acid. In countries where rice is the main staple (eg, China), this does not allow effective folate fortification. Whereas the incidence of NTDs is around 1/1000 in the United States, it is 3- to 5-fold higher in Northern China and 3-fold higher in India. A recent population-based US study estimated that the reduction in NTD rates by folic acid is more modest than previously predicted. The potential of NTD prevention by folic acid is underutilized due to low adherence with folic acid supplementation, and calls for revising the policy of supplementation have been raised. We identified groups of women of reproductive age who may benefit from higher daily doses of folic acid, and this should be considered in current practice. These include women who have had previous pregnancies with NTDs, those who did not plan their pregnancy and hence did not supplement, and women with low intake or impaired adherence to daily folic acid supplementation. In addition, women with known genetic variations in the folate metabolic cycle, those exposed to medications with antifolate effects, smokers, diabetics, and the obese may benefit from higher doses of folic acid daily during the first trimester.

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.

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)0.007
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score0.582

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.343
GPT teacher head0.611
Teacher spread0.267 · 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