MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952570701 · doi:10.1152/ajpheart.00045.2019

Advanced maternal age and the impact on maternal and offspring cardiovascular health

2019· review· en· W2952570701 on OpenAlexafffund
Christy‐Lynn M. Cooke, Sandra T. Davidge

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory Physiology · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsWomen and Children’s Health Research InstituteUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsOffspringPregnancyDiseaseMedicineFetusPreeclampsiaCardiovascular healthIn uteroObstetricsIntrauterine growth restrictionStressorPhysiologyInternal medicineBiologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Delaying pregnancy, which is on the rise, may increase the risk of cardiovascular disease in both women and their children. The physiological mechanisms that lead to these effects are not fully understood but may involve inadequate adaptations of the maternal cardiovascular system to pregnancy. Indeed, there is abundant evidence in the literature that a fetus developing in a suboptimal in utero environment (such as in pregnancies complicated by fetal growth restriction, preterm birth, and/or preeclampsia) is at an increased risk of cardiovascular disease in adulthood, the developmental origins of health and disease theory. Although women of advanced age are at a significantly increased risk of pregnancy complications, there is limited information as to whether advanced maternal age constitutes an added stressor on the prenatal environment of the fetus, and whether or not this is secondary to impaired cardiovascular function during pregnancy. This review summarizes the current literature available on the impact of advanced maternal age on cardiovascular adaptations to pregnancy and the role of maternal age on long-term health risks for both the mother and offspring.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations125
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory PhysiologySame topicBirth, Development, and HealthFrench-language works237,207