MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2165013108 · doi:10.2105/ajph.2014.301898

A Novel System Dynamics Model of Female Obesity and Fertility

2014· article· en· W2165013108 on OpenAlexaff
Nasim S. Sabounchi, Peter S. Hovmand, Nathaniel Osgood, Roland Dyck, Emily S. Jungheim

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Public Health · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersU.S. National Library of MedicineEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsFertilityObesityMedicineBody mass indexPregnancyReproductive healthDemographyWeight lossGerontologyEnvironmental healthPopulationObstetricsGynecologyEndocrinologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to create a system dynamics model specific to weight gain and obesity in women of reproductive age that could inform future health policies and have the potential for use in preconception interventions targeting obese women. METHODS: We used our system dynamics model of obesity in women to test various strategies for family building, including ovulation induction versus weight loss to improve ovulation. Outcomes included relative fecundability, postpartum body mass index, and mortality. RESULTS: Our system dynamics model demonstrated that obese women who become pregnant exhibit increasing obesity levels over time with elevated morbidity and mortality. Alternatively, obese women who lose weight prior to pregnancy have improved reproductive outcomes but may risk an age-related decline in fertility, which can affect overall family size. CONCLUSIONS: Our model highlights important public health issues regarding obesity in women of reproductive age. The model may be useful in preconception counseling of obese women who are attempting to balance the competing risks associated with age-related declines in fertility and clinically meaningful weight loss.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations46
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Public HealthSame topicGestational Diabetes Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207