Birth weights smaller or larger than the placenta predict BMI and blood pressure at age 7 years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We hypothesized that the altered placental proportions that influence birth weight affect childhood body proportions, and that these effects would be independent of birth weight. We also hypothesized that altered placental proportions might affect the fetal cardiovascular system, and may be reflected in variation in childhood blood pressure. By using linear regression with birth weight as the dependent variable, placental variables were entered as predictors. The predicted birth weights based on placental factors were then obtained. The ratio of the actual birth weight to that predicted by placental parameters (observed/expected ratio, OER) was used as the independent variable in analyses of age 7 year body mass index (BMI) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) in the 15,902 singleton liveborns delivered between 34 and 43 weeks. The standardized residual birth weight was also used as a variable to examine the effects of birth weight that is not consistent with placental parameters. For each unit increase in the OER, BMI at 7 years increased 1 kg/m2 (P < 0.0001). The OER also had a significant effect on DBP (β = 4.52, P < 0.001) at 7 years of age but only among African-American children. Results for the standardized residual birth weight variable were consistent with the OER. All results were adjusted for gestational age, sex, socioeconomic status, African-American race and maternal pre-pregnancy BMI. Being larger or smaller than predicted by one's placenta affects childhood body composition and blood pressure. The placental measurements provide insight into pathophysiological mechanisms of the developmental origins of adult disease.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".