The Impact of Gender on Anthropometric Measures of Twins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Literature suggests that male hormones influence fetal growth in singleton pregnancies. We hypothesized that the same phenomenon is seen in twin gestations. OBJECTIVES: (1) to identify the impact of gender associated with fetal birth weight, head circumference, and birth length for twins; (2) to examine the effect of gender on standardized fetal growth at birth, according to gestational age and birth order; (3) to examine the effect of gender on placenta weight and dimensions. METHODOLOGY: This was a population-based retrospective cohort study of twins (4,368 twins, 2,184 pairs) born in British Columbia, Canada from 2000-2010. We excluded twins with stillbirth, congenital anomalies, and those delivered with cesarean section. We also controlled for confounding factors, including birth order, gestational age, maternal anthropometric measures, maternal smoking habits, and obstetric history. A subsample of this population was analyzed from Children and Women Hospital to obtain chorionicity information. RESULTS: Male-male twins were heavier than male-females and female-female twin pairs (p=.01). Within sex-discordant twin pairs, males were also heavier than females (p=.01). Regression analysis suggested that gender affects birth weight independent of birth order and gestational age. Other newborn anthropometric measures were not found to be dependent on gender. In analyzing a subsample with chorionicity data, birth weight was the only anthropometric measure that was both statistically and clinically affected by sex, even after adjustment for gestational age, chorionicity, birth order, and maternal age. CONCLUSION: Birth weight was affected by gender while head circumference and birth length were not.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".