MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evidence for suboptimal use of periconceptional folic acid supplements globally

2004· review· en· W1970860624 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

VenueBJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFolate and B Vitamins Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersCenters for Disease Control and Prevention
KeywordsMedicineFolic acidPregnancyObstetricsPediatricsInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To systematically summarise the available evidence concerning the rate of folic acid supplement use pre- and periconceptionally, to identify those characteristics associated with low rates of use and to assess whether folic acid public awareness campaigns are associated with higher folic acid use. DESIGN: Systematic overview. SETTING: Survey studies. POPULATION: Women of reproductive age, most of whom were currently or recently pregnant. METHODS: Two investigators searched MEDLINE, Embase and Nutriotiongate databases between 1990 and 2003. Bibliographies of retrieved references were scanned for other relevant publications, and authors were contacted if necessary. Studies were included that evaluated the rate of folic acid supplement use either before conception or in early pregnancy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rate of preconceptional and/or periconceptional folic acid use, rate of planned pregnancy in each study, as well as significant characteristics differentiating non-users from users of folic acid, including the effect of folic acid awareness campaigns. RESULTS: A total of 52 studies were included. In 34 studies, reported preconceptional folic acid use varied from 0.9% to 50%. In 49 studies, the reported rate of periconceptional supplement use ranged from 0.5% to 52%. Significant predictors of reduced periconceptional folic acid use were a low level of formal education, immigrant status, young maternal age, lack of a partner and an unplanned pregnancy. Four studies examined the effect of mass media campaigns on periconceptional folic acid use; the reported rates increased significantly, by a factor of 1.7 to 7.2, but in no study was the post-campaign rate above 50%. CONCLUSIONS: In many countries, fewer than 50% of women take periconceptional folic acid supplements. Consideration should be given to the practical advantages of folic acid fortification of centrally processed foods, such as wheat, corn and rice flour, while further promoting vitamin tablet supplement use and planned pregnancy.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.312
GPT teacher head0.488
Teacher spread0.176 · 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