MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122846642 · doi:10.1093/ije/dyt207

Commentary: The developmental origins of health and disease: an appreciation of the life and work of Professor David J.P. Barker, 1938-2013

2013· article· en· W2122846642 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Caroline Fall, Clive Osmond

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Epidemiology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research Council
KeywordsDiseaseNeglectMedicineGerontologyEtiologyPsychiatryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

David J.P. Barker was a physician, a biologist and one of the most influential epidemiologists of our time. His ‘foetal programming hypothesis’ (‘Barker hypothesis’) transformed our thinking about the causes of diabetes, cardiovascular disease and cancer. He challenged the idea that they are explained by bad genes and unhealthy adult lifestyles, and proposed that their roots lie in the early life environment: ‘The nourishment a baby receives from its mother, and its exposure to infection after birth, determine its susceptibility to chronic disease in later life’.1,2 By permanently ‘programming’ the body’s metabolism and growth, they determine the pathologies of old age. His initially controversial, but now widely accepted, ideas have stimulated an explosion of research worldwide into early development and later disease (‘developmental origins of health and disease’ or DOHaD). David thought that ‘the poorer health of people in lower socio-economic groups or living in impoverished places is linked to neglect of the welfare of mothers and babies’. He argued that to pull back the modern epidemics of chronic disease we should prioritize the health and nutrition of girls, pregnant women and infants.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.058
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.058
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.007
Open science0.0090.003
Research integrity0.0540.063
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.009

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.309 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations15
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of EpidemiologySame topicBirth, Development, and HealthFrench-language works237,207