MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100914348 · doi:10.1375/twin.5.1.15

Twinning and Birth Weight in the Israeli Jewish Versus Muslim Maternities

2002· article· en· W2100914348 on OpenAlexaff
Ran D. Goldman, Ram Mazkereth, Isaac Blickstein

Bibliographic record

VenueTwin Research · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthnic groupMedicineDemographyJudaismPopulationCohortEthnic originBirth weightPregnancyObstetricsSociologyInternal medicineHistoryGeneticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ethnicity differences account for genetic, environmental, lifestyle, and reproductive variables, influencing the rate of twinning (Nylander, 1981). Frequently, ethnic differences correlate with variable perinatal care leading to differences in outcome. Free access to antenatal care, and to facilities for delivery and neonatal care is available for the entire population in Israel, and therefore differences attributed to levels of medical care are practically negligible. We previously evaluated the overall relationship between ethnicity and outcome in a population-based cohort of mothers of twins (Goldman et al., 2001). However, the overall comparison may have masked some differences that could be present. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether ethnicity is associated with differences in perinatal outcome in randomly selected, matched-controlled Israeli Jewish and Muslim mothers of twins.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations4
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTwin ResearchSame topicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin PregnancyFrench-language works237,207