The association of crown‐rump length discrepancy with birthweight discordance in spontaneous versus IVF monochorionic twins: a multicenter study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the associations of crown-rump length (CRL) discrepancy with birthweight discordance in spontaneous versus in vitro fertilization (IVF) monochorionic (MC) twin pregnancies. METHOD: This is a multicenter retrospective study on women with twin pregnancies assessed for nuchal translucency between January 1997 and July 2013. The study group was subdivided into MC twins conceived spontaneously and after IVF. Pregnancies with later fetal death or twin transfusion syndrome were excluded. A large-weight discordance was defined as a difference of birthweights of >15%. RESULTS: The study group included 171 pregnancies; of them, 142 (83%) were spontaneous and 29 (17%) were IVF conceived. In the entire cohort, we found a significant correlation between birthweight discordance and CRL discrepancy (r = 0.173, P < 0.05). While a significant correlation was found between CRL discrepancy and birthweight discordance in spontaneous-conceived pregnancies (n = 142, r = 0.24, P = 0.005), such correlation was not present in IVF pregnancies (n = 29, r = -0.7, P = 0.724). A logistic regression analysis found significant odds of larger-weight discordance for each increase of 1% in CRL discrepancy among spontaneously conceived pregnancies (odds ratio = 1.1, confidence interval = 1.03-1.2, P = 0.005). A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) for large-weight discordance in the spontaneously conceived pregnancies demonstrated an area under the ROC curve of 0.613 (P = 0.039). CONCLUSION: The significant correlation between CRL discrepancy and birthweight discordance in spontaneous versus IVF MC twin pregnancies might suggest differential monozygotic twinning process.
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 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".