MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122277558

Caffeine during pregnancy? In moderation.

2000· article· en· W2122277558 on OpenAlexaff
Gideon Koren

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoffee research and impacts
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPregnancyCaffeineMedicineMiscarriageConfoundingModerationObstetricsInternal medicinePsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

QUESTION: Many of my female patients, those who plan pregnancy or have conceived, are afraid of any intake of caffeine. This often makes their lives miserable during pregnancy. Is this justified scientifically? ANSWER: Motherisk's recent meta-analysis suggests that the risks for miscarriage and fetal growth retardation increase only with daily doses of caffeine above 150 mg/d, equivalent to six typical cups of coffee a day. It is possible that some of this presumed risk is due to confounders, such as cigarette smoking.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score0.500

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations13
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicCoffee research and impactsFrench-language works237,207