MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122858480 · doi:10.24095/hpcdp.31.3.04

Estimating gestational age at birth: a population-based derivation-validation study

2011· article· en· W2122858480 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Marcelo L. Urquía, Thérèse A. Stukel, K Fung, Richard H. Glazier, JG Ray

Bibliographic record

VenueChronic diseases and injuries in Canada · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMaternal and Neonatal Healthcare
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term CareInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences
KeywordsSingletonGestational ageBirth weightMedicineDiscriminative modelGestationPopulationObstetricsLinear regressionPediatricsPregnancyDemographyStatisticsMathematicsComputer scienceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Information on newborn gestational age (GA) is essential in research on perinatal and infant health, but it is not always available from administrative databases. We developed and validated a GA prediction model for singleton births for use in epidemiological studies. METHODS: Derivation of estimated GA was calculated based on 130 328 newborn infants born in Ontario hospitals between 2007 and 2009, using linear regression analysis, with several infant and maternal characteristics as the predictor (independent) variables. The model was validated in a separate sample of 130 329 newborns. RESULTS: The discriminative ability of the linear model based on infant birth weight and sex was reasonably approximate for infants born before the 37th week of gestation (r2 = 0.67; 95% CI: 0.65-0.68), but not for term births (37-42 weeks; r2 = 0.12; 95% CI: 0.12-0.13). Adding other infant and maternal characteristics did not improve the model discrimination. CONCLUSION: Newborn gestational age before 37 weeks can be reasonably approximated using locally available data on birth weight and sex.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
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 score0.375
Threshold uncertainty score0.755

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.311 · 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

Citations10
Published2011
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChronic diseases and injuries in CanadaSame topicMaternal and Neonatal HealthcareFrench-language works237,207