MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3125013422 · doi:10.1111/jsap.13292

Folic acid supplementation does not decrease stillbirths and congenital malformations in a guide dog colony

2021· article· en· W3125013422 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kyle Gonzales, Thomas R. Famula, Lynna C. Feng, H. M. N. Power, Jenna M. Bullis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Small Animal Practice · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFolate and B Vitamins Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCaesarean sectionFolic acidPregnancyObstetricsFolic acid supplementationCongenital malformationsUmbilical herniaIncidence (geometry)GestationLogistic regressionPediatricsHerniaSurgeryInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To investigate if maternal folic acid supplementation (5 mg) is associated with a reduction of cleft palates, umbilical hernias, stillbirths and caesarean sections in a guide dog breeding colony. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Labrador retrievers, golden retrievers and Labrador/golden Crosses from the breeding colony of a professional guide dog training organisation were eligible for inclusion. Dams in the treatment group (n = 137) received 5 mg oral folic acid supplementation daily from the start of pro-oestrous through day 40 of gestation. A historical control group (n = 134) was selected from the previous calendar year for comparison. A logistic regression model identified the relative risk of disease (cleft palates, umbilical hernias, stillbirths and caesarean sections) for puppies whose dams did or did not receive folic acid supplementation. RESULTS: A total of 1917 puppies (890 control, 1027 treatment; from 294 litters) were produced during the entire study period, with 994 puppies (494 control, 500 treatment; from 144 litters) born to the subset of dams (n = 72) who produced litters during both the control and treatment periods. All 95% highest posterior densities of relative risk included 1.0, failing to detect differences between the treatment and control groups on incidence rate of cleft palate (control: 2.25%; treatment: 2.34%), umbilical hernias (control: 1.91%; treatment: 3.12%), stillbirths (control: 3.26%; treatment: 2.92%) and caesarean sections (control: 1.45%; treatment: 1.28%). CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: There was no observable reduction of cleft palate, umbilical hernia, stillbirth or caesarean section associated with folic acid supplementation during pregnancy in the study colony. For a domestic dog cohort with a low tendency of hereditary malformations, such as this study colony, 5 mg dietary folic acid supplementation should not be expected to drastically improve or eradicate these diseases.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Small Animal PracticeSame topicFolate and B Vitamins ResearchFrench-language works237,207