Head Circumference in Canadian Male Adults: Development of a Normalized Chart
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
Macrocephaly has been reported as one of the few physiological markers of several syndromes which are identified during childhood. However, only a limited number of studies have investigated whether macrocephaly persists in adults in these conditions, due to an absence of up-to-date reference charts constructed for typically developing adults. Available adult head circumference reference charts either don't measure individuals beyond 21 years of age, are outdated, mostly use homogeneous samples and most importantly do not account for the individual's height and weight at the same time. Two hundred twenty-one male adults were recruited in a large urban community. For each participant, height, weight and head circumference were measured. A significant positive relationship was found between head circumference and height (r=0.379) as well as between head circumference and weight (r=0.391) and a weaker positive correlation with bodymass index (r=0.213). Charts to determine the level of head circumference abnormalities in adulthood are provided, along with a calculation formula for head circumference based on height and weight. The findings indicate the necessity of taking height and weight into account when measuring head circumference in adults.
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) | 0.001 | 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 it