Growth of infants during the first 18 months of life in urban and rural areas of southern China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Observe the growth pattern of infants from birth to 18 months. METHODOLOGY: A prospective study was conducted from 1994 to 1996 in urban and township-rural areas of Guangdong Province, southern China, recruiting 568 and 257 newborn infants, respectively. Anthropometric data was collected at birth, 1.5, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 15, and 18 months. RESULTS: The urban infants at birth had Z-scores of weight for age (WAZ), height for age (HAZ) and weight for height (WHZ) below the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) median (P < 0.01). However, from 1.5 to 4 months, the WAZ and WHZ scores were above (P < 0.01), but by 7 months fell and remained at - 0.7 to - 0.8 SD below the NCHS median (P < 0.01). HAZ scores improved after birth, were at the NCHS median to 8 months (P = NS), and then decreased to 0.2-0.4 SD below the NCHS median (P < 0.01). Compared with the urban infants, the township-rural infants were lighter and shorter throughout the first 18 months of life, and from 8 months of age, were - 1 SD or more below the NCHS median. CONCLUSIONS: Growth retardation was found in this sample of Chinese infants. The magnitude of growth retardation was greater for infants in the township-rural area compared with those in the urban area.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".