Folic acid usage and awareness in pregnant women in Istanbul, Turkey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intake of folic in the periconceptional period reduces the risk of neural tube defects (NTDs). The aim of this study was to assess the level of awareness regarding the use of folic acid in pregnacy. We assessed the consumption of folic acid during pregnancy among Turkish women presented to the hospital and analyzed the difference of folic acid supplementation between planned and unplanned pregnancies. Of the 1076 women, 677 (62.9%) reported current use of a prenatal folic acid at the time of the department visit, while 399 pregnant women (37.0%) identified themselves as non-users (p = 0.006). In the unplanned pregnancy group, 302 (65.22%) women reported taking folic acid during pregnancy, but 161 (34.77%) women began three months prior to conception as recommended by their gynecologists (p<0.0001). Although, the study group was a significant user with a high awareness of folic acid, our findings may not be generalizable to other areas of the country. Because, parcitipants were likely to be one of the most educated group with a medium or high socio-economical status. Besides these hopeful results, we believe the necessity to re-evaluate our educational strategies and consider reduction of unplanned pregnancies as part of our goals.
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".