MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161285022 · doi:10.1080/01443610220130517

Serum lipoprotein (A) and apolipoproteins during pregnancy and postpartum in normal women

2002· article· en· W2161285022 on OpenAlexaff
Janice Rymer, Stefan H. Constable, P Lumb, Martin Crook

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineObstetricsPregnancyLipoproteinLipoprotein(a)PhysiologyInternal medicineCholesterolGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study was designed to investigate whether serum lipoprotein (a) is affected by pregnancy and to relate this to changes in other lipids, lipoproteins and apolipoproteins. The study involved twenty-nine healthy Caucasian pregnant women at term and 27 non-pregnant women matched for age who acted as controls. Samples of venous blood were obtained from 29 pregnant women at term (between 37 and 42 weeks) and 22 of these women provided a second sample after 12 weeks post-partum. Twenty-seven non-pregnant women acted as controls. Samples were taken for Lp(a) and also cholesterol, triglyceride, HDL-cholesterol, apolipoprotein (apo) A and B1. No significant difference was found in the serum concentrations of Lp(a). However, the pregnant women had significantly higher serum concentrations of cholesterol, triglyceride, apo A1 and B (P<0.001) than the controls. The ratio of apo A1: apo B was significantly lower than controls (P<0.001). HDL-cholesterol was not altered by pregnancy but was lower (P<0.05) than the controls after a period of 12 weeks post-partum. Despite a hyperlipidaemia in pregnancy the serum concentrations of Lp(a) are not affected suggesting different metabolic control for this lipoprotein.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.269
Threshold uncertainty score0.471

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations17
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Obstetrics and GynaecologySame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207