MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107763720 · doi:10.1300/j026v23n02_04

Promoting Alcohol Abstinence Among Pregnant Women

2005· review· en· W2107763720 on OpenAlexaff
Sameer Deshpande, Michael D. Basil, Lynn Basford, Karran Thorpe, Noëlla A. Piquette-Tomei, Judith Droessler, Kelly Cardwell, Robert J. Williams, Alexandre Bureau

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Marketing Quarterly · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Substance Exposure Effects
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbstinencePregnancyConsumption (sociology)MedicineEnvironmental healthAlcohol consumptionAlcoholPsychiatrySocial marketingPsychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fetal Alcohol Syndrome Disorder (FASD) is one of the most preventable sources of developmental abnormalities, and has a singular cause-alcohol consumption during pregnancy. Estimates for the costs of treatment of a single case of FASD range often above one million dollars. The primary strategy for prevention currently centers on no alcohol consumption during pregnancy. However, a sizeable number of North American women currently drink during pregnancy. A literature review examined the behavior of maternal alcohol consumption in order to understand the rationale associated with drinking. Generally, it appears that pregnant women differ by their alcohol consumption habits and their reasons to drink. In an attempt to eliminate FASD, we review a number of educational, legal, and community-based programs that have been used to promote abstinence and examine where they have been successful. Unfortunately, social marketing strategies have received less attention. Several potential applications of social marketing directed to drinking-during- pregnancy campaigns are suggested, and possible contributions to the overall effort are explained.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations26
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Marketing QuarterlySame topicPrenatal Substance Exposure EffectsFrench-language works237,207