Steroid concentrations in antepartum and postpartum saliva: normative values in women and correlations with serum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Saliva has been advocated as an alternative to serum or plasma for steroid monitoring. Little normative information is available concerning expected concentrations of the major reproductive steroids in saliva during pregnancy and the extended postpartum. METHODS: Matched serum and saliva specimens controlled for time of day and collected less than 30 minutes apart were obtained in 28 women with normal singleton pregnancies between 32 and 38 weeks of gestation and in 43 women during the first six months postpartum. Concentrations of six steroids (estriol, estradiol, progesterone, testosterone, cortisol, dehydroepiandrosterone) were quantified in saliva by enzyme immunoassay. RESULTS: For most of the steroids examined, concentrations in antepartum saliva showed linear increases near end of gestation, suggesting an increase in the bioavailable hormone component. Observed concentrations were in agreement with the limited data available from previous reports. Modal concentrations of the ovarian steroids were undetectable in postpartum saliva and, when detectable in individual women, approximated early follicular phase values. Only low to moderate correlations between the serum and salivary concentrations were found, suggesting that during the peripartum period saliva provides information that is not redundant to serum. CONCLUSIONS: Low correlations in the late antepartum may be due to differential rates of change in the total and bioavailable fractions of the circulating steroid in the final weeks of the third trimester as a consequence of dynamic changes in carrier proteins such as corticosteroid binding globulin.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".