Congenital Anomalies in the Offspring of Nurses: Association with Area of Employment During Pregnancy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to determine whether registered nurses in specific areas of employment during pregnancy had a higher risk for congenital anomalies in their offspring. An offspring cohort (n = 22,611) was created through linkage of the British Columbia Vital Statistics Agency live and stillbirth records from 1986 to 2000, to a female cohort database of registered nurses. Of these, 16,005 (70.8%) were registered in a specific area of employment when pregnant. Odds ratios were calculated using generalized estimating equations (GEE), binary logistic regression with adjustment for sex, mother's age, and year of birth. Elevated risks of congenital anomalies were found for the singleton offspring of nurses employed in the following areas: operating rooms and pediatric nursing units (heart anomalies); maternal newborn units (integument); emergency room (respiratory system); and psychiatry (upper alimentary tract). Further research is needed to determine whether these are chance or consistent findings and whether exposure patterns might provide biological plausibility.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it