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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score0.976

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.041
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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