Birth weight and cardiac function assessed by echocardiography in adolescence: Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Maternal hemodynamics in pregnancy is associated with fetal growth and birth weight, which in turn are associated with offspring cardiovascular disease later in life. The aim of this study was to quantify the extent to which birth weight is associated with cardiac structure and function in adolescence. METHODS: A subset of offspring (n = 1964; 55% female) of the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children were examined with echocardiography at a mean age of 17.7 (SD, 0.3) years. The associations of birth-weight Z-score for sex and gestational age with cardiac structure (assessed by relative wall thickness, left ventricular mass index (LVMI) and left atrial diameter index), systolic function (assessed by ejection fraction and left ventricular wall velocity) and diastolic function (assessed by early/late mitral inflow velocity (E/A) and early mitral inflow velocity/mitral annular early diastolic velocity (E/e')) were evaluated. Linear regression models were adjusted for several potential confounders, including maternal prepregnancy body mass index, age, level of education and smoking during pregnancy. RESULTS: ; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.67). There was no or inconsistent evidence of associations of birth-weight Z-score with relative wall thickness, left atrial diameter and measurements of systolic function. Further analyses suggested that the association between birth-weight Z-score and LVMI was driven mainly by an association observed in participants born small-for-gestational age and it did not persist when risk factors in adolescence were accounted for. CONCLUSIONS: Higher birth weight adjusted for sex and gestational age was associated with differences in measures of diastolic function in adolescence, but the observed associations were small. It remains to be determined the extent to which these associations translate into increased susceptibility to cardiovascular disease later in life. © 2018 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".