MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036089136 · doi:10.1093/aje/kwaa100

RE: “INVITED COMMENTARY: THE DISILLUSIONMENT OF DEVELOPMENTAL ORIGINS OF HEALTH AND DISEASE (DOHAD) EPIDEMIOLOGY”

2020· letter· en· W3036089136 on OpenAlexafffund
Hazel Inskip, Keith M. Godfrey, Cyrus Cooper, Mark A. Hanson, Caroline Fall, Janis Baird, Mary Barker, Deborah M. Sloboda, Lucilla Poston

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Epidemiology · 2020
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health SciencesMcMaster University Medical Centre
FundersMedical Research CouncilCanada Research ChairsKing's College LondonTommy's Baby CharityKing’s College LondonBritish Heart FoundationNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsEpidemiologyDiseaseGerontologyMedicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We were surprised by the first article in the January issue of the American Journal of Epidemiology. With the title “Invited Commentary: The Disillusionment of Developmental Origins of Health and Disease (DOHaD) Epidemiology” (1), we anticipated a broad discussion of epidemiology in DOHaD and a critique of the concept. Instead, we read a commentary on a 2018 paper by Masarwa et al. (2). The commentary notes that this systematic review was not very informative. We do not understand how criticism of an article on a specific topic could justify a title indicative of disillusionment with the epidemiology of DOHaD in its entirety, especially as the DOHaD concept focuses on developmental exposures other than teratology (3). The authors of the commentary themselves note that their criticism of the DOHaD concept is confined to medication use during pregnancy, but their concluding paragraph, which is dismissive of DOHaD, bears no relevance to their opinion of the article. The commentary’s title, while possibly reflecting the opinion of the authors, misrepresents the contents of the commentary, and we ask that it be amended and an erratum published. H.I., K.G., C.C., J.B., and M.B. are supported wholly or in part by the Medical Research Council. K.G. is also supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR Senior Investigator Award NF-SI-0515-10042) and the British Heart Foundation (grant RG/15/17/3174). M.H. is supported by the British Heart Foundation. D.S. is supported by the Canada Research Chairs Program. L.P. is supported by King’s College London and Tommy’s Charity. All of the authors are members of the International Society for Developmental Origins of Health and Disease. K.G. is the Treasurer, C.C. was a founding Trustee and is a previous member of the DOHaD Council, M.H. is a past President, C.F. is a past Secretary and a Trustee, M.B. is a Trustee, D.S. is the current Secretary, and L.P. is the current President.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.101
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.101
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0130.007
Scholarly communication0.0100.011
Open science0.0070.006
Research integrity0.1400.124
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.013

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.287 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of EpidemiologySame topicBirth, Development, and HealthFrench-language works237,207