Profil de consommation d’acide folique et de substances actives pendant la grossesse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resume Objectifs : Evaluer la consommation periconceptionnelle d’acide folique, seul ou contenu dans une multivitamine, ainsi que les quantites de medicaments, d’alcool, de tabac et de cafeine utilisees par les femmes enceintes. Methodologie : Etude descriptive transversale faite aupres de femmes enceintes d’au moins 28 semaines, recrutees dans les cliniques de medecine familiale ou de grossesse a risque de l’hopital St-Francois d’Assise en janvier 2003. Les donnees ont ete obtenues au moyen d’un questionnaire et completees a l’aide du dossier medical des femmes interrogees. Resultats : Soixante-sept (67) femmes ont participe a cette etude, dont 35 provenant de la clinique de grossesse a risque et 32, de la clinique de grossesse normale. Les multivitamines et l’acide folique seuls ont ete utilises par 90 % et 63 % des femmes respectivement avant ou pendant la grossesse. Quarante-deux pour cent (42 %) des femmes commencent leur consommation de vitamines prenatales au cours de la grossesse alors que 18 % ont pris de l’acide folique avant l’annonce de la grossesse. Les deux tiers (67 %) ont pris des medicaments sur prescription (1,3 ± 0,1/femme) et 80,6 % ont pris des medicaments en vente libre (1,2 ± 0,1/femme). La moitie des femmes (52 %) ont rapporte avoir consomme de faibles quantites d’alcool. L’usage du tabac a ete rapporte par 18 % des femmes alors que l’usage de cafeine s’elevait a 88 %. Conclusion : Peu de femmes enceintes ont suivi les lignes directrices concernant la prise d’acide folique, mais certaines ont consomme moins de medicaments, de cafeine, d’alcool et de tabac que par le passe. Abstract Objective: To evaluate periconceptional folic acid supplementation (alone or in a multivitamin) as well as the quantities of drugs, alcohol, tobacco, caffeine used in pregnant women. Methods: A cross-sectional study was done with women pregnant at least 28 weeks, recruited in the family medicine or high-risk pregnancy clinics at the St-Francois d’Assise Hospital in January 2003. The data were obtained using a questionnaire and the medical charts of the women that were interviewed. Results: 67 women participated in the study, of which 35 were from the high risk pregnancy clinic and 32 from the regular pregnancy clinic. A multivitamin and folic acid alone were used by 90% and 63% of women, respectively, before and during pregnancy. 42% of women started supplementing with prenatal vitamins during pregnancy while 18% of women started supplementing before pregnancy. Two thirds (67%) of women took prescription drugs (1.3 ± 0.1/woman) while 80.6% of women took over-the-counter medications (1.2 ± 0.1/woman). Half of the women reported having consumed small quantities of alcohol. Tobacco use was reported by 18% of women while caffeine use reported by 88% of women. Conclusion: Few pregnant women followed the guidelines regarding folic acid supplementation. However, some women consumed less medication, caffeine, alcohol and tobacco than in the past. Key words: pregnancy; folic acid; tobacco use; alcohol; medication.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".