MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063983282 · doi:10.1055/s-0030-1263299

Preterm Birth and Adolescent Bone Mineral Content

2010· article· en· W2063983282 on OpenAlexafffund
Marta Erlandson, Lauren B. Sherar, Adam Baxter‐Jones, Stefan A. Jackowski, Heidi Ludwig-Auser, Chris Arnold, Koravangattu Sankaran

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Perinatology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsSaskatchewan Health AuthorityRoyal University HospitalUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineBone mineral contentBirth weightBone mineralDual-energy X-ray absorptiometryGestationLow birth weightObstetricsPediatricsOsteoporosisPregnancyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to determine the influence of preterm low birth weight on bone mineral content in adolescence. In 2007 to 2008, data on adolescents were obtained for study, including 16 females and 25 males who were born preterm (≤37 weeks' gestation) between October 1, 1989, and December 31, 1995, with a birth weight of less than 1850 g. Preterm low-birth-weight individuals were age- and sex-matched to full-term (>37 weeks) normal-birth-weight (>2500 g) controls. Total body, hip, and spine bone mineral content (BMC) was assessed using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry. Male preterm individuals had less BMC at the proximal femur in adolescence compared with controls ( p < 0.05). However, once adjusted for age, maturity, height, weight, physical activity, and diet, there were no differences between groups ( p < 0.05) in any bone parameters. These findings suggest that preterm birth and low birth weight did not influence bone accrual in these individuals at adolescence.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.597
Threshold uncertainty score0.318

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Citations13
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of PerinatologySame topicBone health and osteoporosis researchFrench-language works237,207