Lack of a significant relationship between energy intake in pregnancy and gestational weight gain underlines the need for further evaluations of energy metabolism during this time
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Commentary on: Jebeile H, Mijatovic J, Louie JC, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of energy intake and weight gain in pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2016;214(4):465–83[OpenUrl][1][CrossRef][2][PubMed][3]. Recent updates to gestational weight gain (GWG) guidelines recommend women gain weight within a specific range, based on pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI), to support the best pregnancy outcomes. While many women exceed the GWG guidelines, the extent to which this reflects inappropriate increases in energy intake is unclear. This study set out to determine whether a greater increment in reported energy intake between early and late pregnancy was associated with greater or excessive GWG. The authors conducted a systematic review of studies of women with a full-term singleton pregnancy that included measurement of … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DAm%2BJ%2BObstet%2BGynecol%26rft.volume%253D214%26rft.spage%253D465%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1016%252Fj.ajog.2015.12.049%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F26739796%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.ajog.2015.12.049&link_type=DOI [3]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=26739796&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febmed%2F21%2F5%2F192.atom
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Commentary About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | low |
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.029 | 0.182 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.006 |
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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".