Maternal serum marker medians in Aboriginal Canadian women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The study evaluates the differences between Aboriginal and Caucasian women in the levels of maternal serum markers used in second-trimester Down syndrome screening (alpha-fetoprotein, unconjugated estriol, and total human chorionic gonadotrophin). METHODS: A case-control study compared the levels of serum markers in 401 Aboriginal women and 1565 matched controls selected from 7717 Caucasian women. The cases and controls were screened in a single centre and matched for maternal age, parity, and sample date. Women with multiple pregnancies and pregnancies associated with Down syndrome, open neural tube defects, trisomy 18, and insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus as well as women without weight recorded were excluded from the study. RESULTS: No differences in the levels of maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein and total human chorionic gonadotrophin were observed between the two groups. Maternal serum unconjugated estriol was 12% higher in Aboriginal women. DISCUSSION: Since Aboriginal women make up only a small proportion of women screened, correcting the level of uE3 for this group will have little effect on the overall screening performance. However, if these results are confirmed by further study, individual centres may consider making this correction, so optimal screening performance can be achieved in Aboriginal women.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".