Prediction of small for gestational age by logistic regression in twins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Small for gestational age (SGA) is one of the major determinants of perinatal mortality and morbidity, and may relate in adult diseases. Early prediction of SGA could be helpful for health care providers and public health workers in guiding antenatal management and prevention. The reported methods of SGA prediction are not satisfactory because the diagnostic performance is poor and the interval between prediction and delivery is too short. AIMS: To establish a SGA prediction model for twin pregnancies based on variables obtainable in early gestation. METHODS: We used a large twin registry United States data (1995-1997). The study subjects were randomly divided into two groups: group 1 to establish the prediction model by logistic regression and group 2 to validate the prediction model. SGA was defined as birth weight for gestational age z scores less than 10th percentiles. Pair of twin was the unit of analysis. Two sets of multiple logistic regression analyses with different outcome measures - one or both twins SGAs and both twins SGAs - were used to establish the prediction model. RESULTS: The sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value were 52.3, 62.5, and 21.5%, respectively, at the cutoff value 0.16 in a SGA prediction model based on maternal race, education, marital status, parity, prenatal care visit initiation, cigarette smoking, and paternal race. CONCLUSIONS: A prediction model based on determinants that can be obtained at early gestation might be useful in the management of pregnancies with high risk of SGA in twins.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".