Clitoral size in term newborns in Kumasi, Ghana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Data on normative clitoral sizes in newborns is relatively sparse and racial/ethnic differences have also been reported. This study was performed to establish norms for clitoral size in term Ghanaian female newborns. This was a cross-sectional study of all apparently well full-term newborns of postnatal age < 48 h and birth weight between 2.5 and 4.0 kg delivered at Komfo Anokye Teaching Hospital between May and September, 2014. Anthropometric and genital parameters were documented for study subjects as well as parental socio-demographic indices. In 612 newborn females studied, the mean (±SD) clitoral length (MCL) and the mean (±SD) clitoral width (MCW) were 4.13 ± 1.6 mm and 4.21 ± 1.1 mm, respectively. MCL was inversely related to birth weight (r = −0.62; p < 0.001) while MCW was inversely related to both gestational age (r = −0.1; p = 0.02) and birth weight (r = −0.54; p < 0.001). Babies with a clitoris that was completely covered by the labia majora had relatively lower clitoral sizes (p < 0.001) than those who had a partially covered or prominent clitoris. Neither MCL nor MCW differed significantly by birth length or maternal tribe. Clitoral size varies with birth weight and gestational age. Babies with a completely covered clitoris are unlikely to warrant detailed clitoral measurements for clitoromegaly.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".