Lack of Association between Folate-Receptor Autoantibodies and Neural-Tube Defects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A previous report described the presence of autoantibodies against folate receptors in 75% of serum samples from women with a history of pregnancy complicated by a neural-tube defect, as compared with 10% of controls. We sought to confirm this finding in an Irish population, which traditionally has had a high prevalence of neural-tube defects. METHODS: We performed two studies. Study 1 consisted of analysis of stored frozen blood samples collected from 1993 through 1994 from 103 mothers with a history of pregnancy complicated by a neural-tube defect (case mothers), 103 mothers with a history of pregnancy but no complication by a neural-tube defect (matched with regard to number of pregnancies and sampling dates), 58 women who had never been pregnant, and 36 men. Study 2, conducted to confirm that the storage of samples did not influence the folate-receptor autoantibodies, included fresh samples from 37 case mothers, 22 control mothers, 10 women who had never been pregnant, and 9 men. All samples were assayed for blocking and binding autoantibodies against folate receptors. RESULTS: In Study 1, blocking autoantibodies were found in 17% of case mothers, as compared with 13% of control mothers (odds ratio, 1.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70 to 3.39), and binding autoantibodies in 29%, as compared with 32%, respectively (odds ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.44 to 1.50). Study 2 showed similar results, indicating that sample degradation was unlikely. CONCLUSIONS: The presence and titer of maternal folate-receptor autoantibodies were not significantly associated with a neural-tube defect-affected pregnancy in this Irish population.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".