MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2983623651 · doi:10.1097/ogx.0000000000000741

Investigating Fetal Growth Restriction and Perinatal Risks in Appropriate for Gestational Age Infants: Using Cohort and Within-Sibling Analyses

2019· article· en· W2983623651 on OpenAlexaff
Sven Cnattingius, Michael S. Kramer, Mikael Norman, Jonas F. Ludvigsson, Fang Fang, Donghao Lu

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrical & Gynecological Survey · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSmall for gestational ageFetal growthGestational ageObstetricsFetusGrowth restrictionAppropriate for gestational ageCutoffIntrauterine growth restrictionPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(Abstracted from BJOG 2019;126(7):842–850) Fetal growth restriction, defined as fetal growth below expectations, is statistically measured by a cutoff of birthweight for gestational age. Small-for-gestational-age (SGA) birth, however, is not always linked with fetal growth restriction: SGA infants may have reached their growth potential and just be small, while larger, non-SGA infants sometimes fail to reach their growth potential.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.173
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.217 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetrical & Gynecological SurveySame topicBirth, Development, and HealthFrench-language works237,207