Spina bifida before and after folic acid fortification in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In 1998, fortification of a large variety of cereal products with folic acid became mandatory in Canada. A multicentric study was carried out to assess the impact of this policy on the frequency of NTDs. The present analysis focused on spina bifida. METHODS: The study population included approximately 2 million livebirths, stillbirths, and terminations of pregnancies because of fetal anomalies among women residing in seven Canadian provinces, from 1993 to 2002. Spina bifida cases were divided according to the upper limit of the defect: upper (cranial, cervical, or thoracic) and lower (lumbar or sacral) defects. Based on published results of red blood cell folate tests, the study period was divided into prefortification, partial fortification, and full fortification periods. RESULTS: A total of 1,286 spina bifida cases were identified: 51% livebirths, 3% stillbirths, and 46% terminations. Prevalence decreased from 0.86/1,000 in the prefortification to 0.40 in the full fortification period, while the proportion of upper defects decreased from 32% to 13%. Following fortification, regional variations in the prevalence and distribution of sites almost disappeared. CONCLUSIONS: Results confirmed the etiologic heterogeneity of spina bifida and the more pronounced effect of folic acid in decreasing the risk of the more severe clinical presentations.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".