MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2288015466 · doi:10.3109/14767058.2015.1137894

Factors that influence excessive gestational weight gain: moving beyond assessment and counselling

2016· review· en· W2288015466 on OpenAlexaffabout
Emily E. Campbell, Paula D.N. Dworatzek, Debbie Penava, Barbra deVrijer, Jason Gilliland, June I. Matthews, Jamie A. Seabrook

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsLawson Health Research InstituteChildren’s Health Research InstituteWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeight gainOverweightPregnancyMedicineBody mass indexObesityObstetricsSocioeconomic statusGestationBody weightPopulationEnvironmental healthEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One in four Canadian adults is obese, and more women are entering pregnancy with a higher body mass index (BMI) than in the past. Pregnant women who are overweight or obese have a higher risk of pregnancy-related complications than women of normal weight. Gestational weight gain (GWG) is also associated with childhood obesity. Although the factors influencing weight gain during pregnancy are multifaceted, little is known about the social inequality of GWG. This review will address some of the socioeconomic factors and maternal characteristics influencing weight gain and the impact that excessive GWG has on health outcomes such as post-partum weight retention. The effects of an overweight or obese pre-pregnancy BMI on GWG and neonatal outcomes will also be addressed. The timing of weight gain is also important, as recommendations now include trimester-specific guidelines. While not conclusive, preliminary evidence suggests that excessive weight gain during the first trimester is most detrimental.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations47
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal MedicineSame topicGestational Diabetes Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207