MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Meta-Analysis of the Worldwide Prevalence of Pica during Pregnancy and the Postpartum Period

2016· article· en· W2517908797 on OpenAlexaff
Emily Fawcett, Jonathan M. Fawcett, Dwight Mazmanian

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetric Anesthesia Digest · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicTherapeutic Uses of Natural Elements
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePica (typography)ChildbirthObstetricsPregnancyMeta-analysisPostpartum periodEnvironmental healthDemographyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2016;133(3):277–283) Pica, the purposeful consumption of nonfood or non-nutritive substances, is commonly reported in women during the period surrounding childbirth. However, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-5 does not provide a prevalence estimate for pica, and current prevalence estimates during pregnancy range from 0.007% in Denmark to 92.5% in Nigeria. In this meta-analysis, authors estimated the prevalence of pica in pregnant and postpartum populations and characterized potential contributing factors/moderators.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.045
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetric Anesthesia DigestSame topicTherapeutic Uses of Natural ElementsFrench-language works237,207