MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Advanced Maternal Age and Offspring Outcomes: Reproductive Aging and Counterbalancing Period Trends

2016· article· en· W2230180990 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kieron Barclay, Mikko Myrskylä

Bibliographic record

VenuePopulation and Development Review · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Dynamics and Relationships
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemographyFertilityBirth ratePopulationPostponementQuarter (Canadian coin)Total fertility rateOffspringCitationGeographyPolitical scienceSociologyFamily planningPregnancyResearch methodologyEconomicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Women are having children later in the developed world.The mean age at first birth has increased in each of the 23 OECD countries since 1970, now averaging 28, and advanced-age fertility has also been increasing.Advanced maternal age is associated with increased risk of poor perinatal outcomes, as well as an increased risk of mortality and cancer in offsprings' adulthood.The research documenting these negative outcomes, however, neglects the potential benefits of being born at a later date.For a prospective parent, delaying parenthood means that the child is born in a later birth cohort.This is beneficial, as for many important outcomes from health to educational attainment, secular trends are positive.We illustrate this general principle using data from Sweden, and show that the macro level contextual trends outweigh the individual risk factors.As a result, fertility postponement even beyond age 40 is positively associated with long-term offspring outcomes.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 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

Citations147
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePopulation and Development ReviewSame topicFamily Dynamics and RelationshipsFrench-language works237,207