MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070374337 · doi:10.1080/09603123.2013.782602

Low birth weight in newborns to women employed in jobs with frequent exposure to organic solvents

2013· article· en· W2070374337 on OpenAlexaff
Arild Vaktskjold, Ljudmila Talykova, Evert Nieboer

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Health Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSingletonLow birth weightMedicineOdds ratioBirth weightPopulationPregnancyObstetricsOddsPediatricsEnvironmental healthLogistic regressionBiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of occupational exposure to organic solvents in pregnancy on foetal growth are still unclear. Our aim was to study whether live newborns to women employed in paid jobs with frequent exposure had a different risk of being born with low birth weight (LBW), compared to those of women in jobs without such exposure. The study population was all singleton newborns delivered in the industrial township of Mončegorsk (N = 26,415). Information about occupation and characteristics of the mothers and babies was obtained from the local population-based birth register, and registered job function was used to classify exposure. We observed an elevated risk of LBW among live, singleton newborns in the exposed group (adjusted odds ratio: 1.68 [95% CI: 1.18-2.41]), which predominantly consisted of painters. The adjusted odds of LBW in the exposed group were also higher among term-born neonates. In addition, a lower mean birth weight was observed among the exposed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.324 · 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

Citations8
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Health ResearchSame topicBirth, Development, and HealthFrench-language works237,207