MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2983775313 · doi:10.1002/oa.2840

Bioarchaeological investigation of an obstetric death at Huigou site (3900–2900 BC), Henan, China

2019· article· en· W2983775313 on OpenAlexaff
Yawei Zhou, Ai Zhang, Sandra Garvie‐Lok, Wanfa Gu, Chuan‐Chao Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Osteoarchaeology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrological Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPubic symphysisPaleopathologyChildbirthMedicinePregnancyOsteologyPelvisChinaObstetricsArchaeologyHistorySurgeryAnatomyPathologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Historical documents record that many young women died of pregnancy, delivery, or related complications. However, such cases are rare archaeologically due to the limitations of archaeological materials. Here, we report the case of an adult female buried with an infant in the Neolithic graveyard of Huigou (Yangshao Culture, 3900–2900 BCE) in China's Henan Province. The remains of the infant were positioned between the lower legs of the adult. Both appear to have died during or shortly after delivery, as the estimated age of the infant is full term. The adult female's pubic symphysis was unusually long compared with a modern Chinese reference sample, a trait that increases the risk of dystocia in modern clinical cases. The pelvis also shows a hyperplastic lesion on the superior margin of the pubic symphysis that might reflect a prior difficult birth that was survived. Taken together this evidence suggests a history of obstetric problems that ultimately led to the death of the woman and her last child. Our reconstruction offers a glimpse of an ancient life, suggesting the difficulties this woman suffered in childbirth before her death and illustrating the insights that osteology can offer into obstetric experiences in the past.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of OsteoarchaeologySame topicUrological Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207