The association between intratwin birthweight discordance and preterm birth in twin pregnancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous studies found that increased birthweight discordance among twins was associated with increased risk of perinatal mortality and morbidity, but there is disagreement regarding the relationship between birthweight discordance and the risk of preterm birth. AIMS: To examine the relationship between intratwin birthweight discordance and preterm birth, and the influence of total birthweight as a confounding factor. METHODS: We conducted a historical cohort study to assess the relationship between intratwin birthweight discordance and preterm birth, using the 1995-1997 twin registry data of the USA. Parallel analyses with and without adjustment for total birthweight were performed. RESULTS: A total of 147,262 eligible twin sets were included in the analysis. In the non-stratified analysis, preterm birth (< 37 weeks) rates were 64.3 and 51.8%, respectively, in subjects with a birthweight discordance > 25% and in those < or = 25%. In the analysis stratified by total birthweight, the rates of preterm birth were higher in subjects with a birthweight discordance > 25% than in those < or = 25% at every total birthweight stratum. Changing the thresholds to define preterm birth or treating gestational age as a continuously distributed variable yielded similar results. Using other methods to adjust for total birthweight also reversed the direction of this relationship. CONCLUSIONS: Increased intratwin birthweight discordance is associated with increased risk of preterm birth, and adjustment for total birthweight biases the relationship to the wrong direction. Clinicians should be aware of the possibility of a preterm birth when there are signs of discordance in birthweight between the two 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 | 0.004 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".