Evaluation of folate concentration in amniotic fluid and maternal and umbilical cord blood during labor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Folate is required for fetal, placental and maternal tissue growth during pregnancy. A decline in maternal circulating folate concentrations and an increase in total homocysteine (a non-specific indicator of folate deficiency) have been observed with the progression of pregnancy. However, the role of folate in the third trimester of pregnancy is not clear and folate status in late pregnancy has not so far been widely analyzed. The main aim of this retrospective cross-sectional study was to determine the folate concentrations in amniotic fluid and in maternal and umbilical cord blood serum derived during delivery. Material and methods: This study was conducted on 175 pregnant Polish women (white/Caucasian) aged between 17 and 42 years. Only pregnancies without birth defects were included in this study. Amniotic fluid, maternal serum, and umbilical cord blood samples were collected during vaginal delivery or cesarean section. Folate concentration was determined using a microbiological assay. Results: Strong correlations were observed between the concentrations of folate in amniotic fluid and maternal serum (rho = 0.67, p < 0.001) and amniotic fluid and cord blood serum (rho = 0.49, p < 0.001) and between maternal serum and cord blood serum (rho = 0.67, p < 0.001). Folate concentrations in amniotic fluid were significantly associated with maternal age (rho = 0.19, p < 0.05). Pre-pregnancy body mass index and maternal weight/neonatal birth weight ratio were independent predictors of folate concentrations in maternal serum ( = 0.33, p < 0.05; = -0.19, p < 0.05) and amniotic fluid ( = 0.28, p < 0.05; = -0.19, p < 0.05) in late pregnancy. Conclusions: Folate concentrations in amniotic fluid are associated with maternal and neonatal folate status peripartum in healthy women.
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 | 0.002 | 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".