MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2897171421 · doi:10.1002/ajhb.23176

Time‐to‐pregnancy and offspring finger‐length ratio (2D:4D)

2018· article· en· W2897171421 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Mahvash Shere, Tye E. Arbuckle, Patricia Monnier, William D. Fraser, Maria P. Vélez

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Human Biology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSexual Differentiation and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalQueen's UniversityCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineUniversité de SherbrookeMcGill University Health CentreHealth Canada
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHealth Canada
KeywordsOffspringPregnancyInfertilityMedicineDigit ratioIn uteroFecundityObstetricsAnogenital distanceDemographyGynecologyFetusInternal medicineBiologyTestosterone (patch)PopulationEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Time-to-Pregnancy (TTP) is an epidemiological tool to assess couple fecundity. The finger digit ratio (2D:4D) has been suggested as a marker of androgen exposure in utero. Maternal, paternal, or couple-mediated factors related to fecundity may also have an effect on androgen exposure during pregnancy. We aimed to investigate the association between TTP, infertility, or use of Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART) and offspring 2D:4D. METHODS: Data from 673 mother-child pairs were collected from questionnaires in the Maternal-Infant Research on Environmental Chemicals (MIREC) study across 10 cities in Canada. The mean maternal age was 33.4 years (SD 4.7), with a median gestational age of 12.1 weeks (SD 1.3), at the time of recruitment. Our study included 338 girls and 335 boys, and the mean age of the children at follow-up was 3.5 years (SD 1.0). TTP was assessed through questionnaires during the first trimester of pregnancy. Digital photographs of both hands were taken in a follow-up study to calculate the children's 2D:4D (2-5 years). anova, t tests, and multiple linear regression analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Boys had significantly lower mean 2D:4Ds (0.936 ±0.041 in right hand, 0.936 ±0.040 in left hand) compared to girls (0.948 ±0.038 in right hand, 0.945 ±0.038 in left hand). The mean 2D:4D did not differ according to TTP, infertility, or use of ART. The only factors associated with the child's 2D:4D were the child's age and maternal 2D:4D. CONCLUSIONS: Our study does not support an association between TTP, infertility, or use of ART and children's 2D:4D.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.479
Threshold uncertainty score0.353

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Human BiologySame topicSexual Differentiation and DisordersFrench-language works237,207