MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2863346784 · doi:10.1177/0020731418786360

Why Is the U.S. Preterm Birth Rate So Much Higher Than the Rates in Canada, Great Britain, and Western Europe?

2018· article· en· W2863346784 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Janet Bronstein, Martha S. Wingate, Anne E. Brisendine

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Health Services · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemographyWelfareBirth rateMedicinePregnancyEnvironmental healthGerontologyDemographic economicsPolitical sciencePopulationFertilityEconomicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The portion of newborns delivered before term is considerably higher in the United States than in other developed countries. We compare the array of risk exposures and protective factors common to women across national settings, using national, regional, and international databases, review articles, and research reports. We find that U.S. women have higher rates of obesity, heart disease, and poor health status than women in other countries. This is in part because more U.S. women are exposed to the stresses of racism and income disparity than women in other national settings, and stress loads are known to disrupt physiological functions. Pregnant women in the United States are not at higher risk for preterm birth because of older maternal age or engagement in high-risk behaviors. However, to a greater extent than in other national settings, they are younger and their pregnancies are unintended. Higher rates of multiple gestation pregnancies, possibly related to assisted reproduction, are also a factor in higher preterm birth rates. Reproductive policies that support intentional childbearing and social welfare policies that reduce the stress of income insecurity can be modeled from those in place in other national settings to address at least some of the elevated U.S. preterm birth rate.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.488
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations30
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Health ServicesSame topicMaternal and Perinatal Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207