MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964935173 · doi:10.1542/peds.2013-3285

United States Birth Weight Reference Corrected For Implausible Gestational Age Estimates

2014· article· en· W1964935173 on OpenAlexaff
Nicole M. Talge, Lanay M. Mudd, Alla Sikorskii, Olga Basso

Bibliographic record

VenuePEDIATRICS · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGestational ageBirth weightPercentileConcordanceObstetricsGestationSingletonPopulationConcordance correlation coefficientPediatricsPregnancyStatisticsInternal medicineMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To provide an updated US birth weight for gestational age reference corrected for likely errors in last menstrual period (LMP)-based gestational age dating, as well as means and SDs, to enable calculation of continuous and categorical measures of birth weight for gestational age. METHODS: From the 2009-2010 US live birth files, we abstracted singleton births between 22 and 44 weeks of gestation with at least 1 nonmissing estimate of gestational age (ie, LMP or obstetric/clinical) and birth weight. Using an algorithm based on birth weight and the concordance between these gestational age estimates, implausible LMP-based gestational age estimates were either excluded or corrected by using the obstetric/clinical estimate. Gestational age- and sex-specific birth weight means, SDs, and smoothed percentiles (3rd, 5th, 10th, 90th, 95th, 97th) were calculated, and the 10th and 90th percentiles were compared with published population-based references. RESULTS: A total of 7 818 201 (99% of eligible) births were included. The LMP-based estimate of gestational age comprised 85% of the dataset, and the obstetric/clinical estimate comprised the remaining 15%. Cut points derived from the current reference identified ∼10% of births as ≤10th and ≥90th percentiles at all gestational weeks, whereas cut points derived from previous US-based references captured variable proportions of infants at these thresholds within the preterm and postterm gestational age ranges. CONCLUSIONS: This updated US-based birth weight for gestational age reference corrects for likely errors in gestational age dating and allows for the calculation of categorical and continuous measures of birth size.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.102

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.005

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 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

Citations337
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePEDIATRICSSame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207