MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171380912 · doi:10.1002/sim.969

A model for foetal growth and diagnosis of intrauterine growth restriction

2001· article· en· W2171380912 on OpenAlexafffund
Peter Hooper, Damon C. Mayes, Nestor Demianczuk

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistics in Medicine · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGestational ageIntrauterine growth restrictionFetal growthResidualPregnancyFetusGrowth modelBirth weightCovarianceObstetricsGrowth curve (statistics)MedicineStatisticsMathematicsBiologyAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A model for foetal growth is developed and used to construct tools for diagnosis of intrauterine growth restriction. Foetal weight estimates are first transformed to normally distributed z-scores. The covariance structure over gestational ages is then estimated using a novel regression model. The diagnostic tools include individual growth curves with error bounds, probabilities to assess whether a foetus is small for its gestational age, and residual scores to determine whether current growth rates are unusual. The methods were developed sing data from 13593 ultrasound examinations involving 7888 foetal subjects. The model shows that median foetal growth velocity increases up to a gestational age of 35 weeks and then decreases during the final weeks of pregnancy. When growth is expressed as change in log weight, or equivalently as change proportional to current weight, the model reveals a constant deceleration as gestational age increases from 14 to 42 weeks.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.004

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.300 · 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

Citations16
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistics in MedicineSame topicBirth, Development, and HealthFrench-language works237,207