MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063301129 · doi:10.1016/j.ijgo.2008.12.003

Tea consumption during pregnancy and the risk of pre‐eclampsia

2009· article· en· W2063301129 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Shu Qin Wei, Hairong Xu, Xu Xiong, Zhong‐Cheng Luo, François Audibert, William D. Fraser

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTea Polyphenols and Effects
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineEclampsiaOdds ratioPregnancyObstetricsUnivariate analysisMultivariate analysisCase-control studyGynecologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of tea consumption during pregnancy on the risk of pre-eclampsia. METHODS: A case-control study was carried out among nulliparous pregnant women in Quebec between January 2003 and March 2006. Data were collected using a structured study questionnaire. A total of 92 women with pre-eclampsia and 245 controls were analyzed. Univariate analysis and multivariate regression were performed to examine the association between tea consumption and pre-eclampsia. RESULTS: Compared with non-tea drinking during pregnancy, the crude odds ratio (OR) and adjusted OR (aOR) of pre-eclampsia for tea drinking were 1.34 (95% CI, 0.80-2.25) and 1.39 (95% CI, 0.81-2.41), respectively. The OR and aOR of severe pre-eclampsia for tea drinking were 1.39 (95% CI, 0.78-2.46) and 2.14 (95% CI, 1.01-4.54), respectively. The aORs for persistent tea consumption in pre-eclampsia and severe pre-eclampsia were 1.88 (95% CI, 1.01-3.51) and 1.95 (95% CI, 1.06-3.57), respectively. CONCLUSION: Persistent tea drinking during pregnancy may be associated with an increased risk of pre-eclampsia.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.170
Threshold uncertainty score0.500

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations34
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Gynecology & ObstetricsSame topicTea Polyphenols and EffectsFrench-language works237,207