Clitoral sizes and anogenital distances in term newborns in Nigeria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous studies suggest significant ethnic and racial differences in clitoral sizes and anogenital distances in the newborn. This study aimed to document normative data on clitoral sizes and anogenital distances of apparently normal term female infants in Sagamu. METHODS: The study was a multi-center, cross-sectional descriptive research carried out among 317 female term infants within the first 72 h of life. Interviewer-based questionnaire was applied to obtain sociodemographic data, pregnancy and birth history. A sliding digital caliper was used for measurement. Data analysis was with SPSS version 20.0. RESULTS: The mean clitoral length was 6.7 ± 1.6 mm while the mean clitoral width was 5.6 ± 0.8 mm. The mean fourchette-clitoris distance, anus-clitoris distance and anus-fourchette distance were 21.9 ± 2.1 mm, 35.5 ± 2.5 mm and 17.0 ± 2.6 mm respectively. The anus-clitoris and anus-fourchette distances significantly correlated with the anthropometric parameters while the clitoral measurements did not. CONCLUSION: The mean values recorded in this study were higher than observed in most previous studies. This simple, affordable and non-invasive evaluation could aid early diagnosis and treatment of female infants with potentially harmful conditions such as congenital adrenal hyperplasia.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".