Associations between birth weight, early childhood weight gain and adult lung function
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Low birth weight is associated with lower values for spirometry in adults but it is not known if birth weight influences other measures of pulmonary function. It is also unclear whether postnatal growth affects adult lung function. The associations between birth weight, postnatal growth and adult lung function were assessed in an unselected birth cohort of 1037 children. METHODS: Birth weight, weight gain between birth and age 3 years, and lung function at age 32 years were measured. Analyses were adjusted for adult height and sex and further adjusted for multiple other potential confounding factors. RESULTS: Birth weight was positively correlated with spirometric (forced expiratory volume in 1 s and forced vital capacity) and plethysmographic (total lung capacity and functional residual capacity) lung function and with lung diffusing capacity. These associations persisted after adjustment for confounding factors including adult weight, exposure to cigarette smoke in utero and during childhood, personal smoking, socioeconomic status, asthma and gestational age. Weight gain between birth and age 3 years was also positively associated with lung diffusing capacity, and with higher values of lung volumes in men after adjustment for covariates. Neither birth weight nor postnatal weight gain was associated with airflow obstruction. CONCLUSIONS: Low birth weight and lower weight gain in early childhood are associated with modest reductions in adult lung function across a broad range of measures of lung volumes and with lower diffusing capacity. These findings are independent of a number of potential confounding factors and support the hypothesis that fetal and infant growth is a determinant of adult lung function.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".