MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effect of Active Smoking During Pregnancy on Women and Newborn Health

2014· article· en· W2023847798 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Emre Yanıkkerem, Semra Ay, Selda lldan Çalim

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Child Health and Nutrition · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare Systems and Public Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePregnancyObstetricsEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of the study was to identify the effect of prenatal smoking on mother and newborn health. The study was carried out in 700 women, who delivered at Merkez Efendi Maternity and Children’s Hospital between 1st January, 2011 and 31st December, 2011. Of the sample of women, 15.6% were current and 7.3% were quitting smokers. Women who continued smoking during pregnancy lived in households with husband who smoked and had higher rates of depressive symptoms and pregnancy included hypertension. Smoker women more likely reported to expose physical violence during pregnancy by their partner. Meconium in amniotic fluid was associated with women smoking status. Newborns who were exposed to tobacco smoke prenatally had deficits in weight (-186.6 gr), height (-0.9 cm) and head circumference at birth (-0.6 cm). In the study when women quit smoking during the first trimester, their infants have anthropometric measures similar to infants of nonsmokers. Smoking during pregnancy was related to low birth weight, height, and with small head circumference. Smoking cessation during pregnancy may have a greater impact on baby anthropometrics measures which were similar to infants of nonsmokers. To protect the health of their future unborn children, it would be optimal to target all women of reproductive age to quit smoking before they consider becoming pregnant.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.323 · 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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Child Health and NutritionSame topicHealthcare Systems and Public HealthFrench-language works237,207