MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210667077 · doi:10.3390/e24020232

Associations between Longitudinal Gestational Weight Gain and Scalar Infant Birth Weight: A Bayesian Joint Modeling Approach

2022· article· en· W4210667077 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Matthew Pietrosanu, Linglong Kong, Yan Yuan, Rhonda C. Bell, Nicole Létourneau, Bei Jiang

Bibliographic record

VenueEntropy · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsWeight gainLinear regressionRegression analysisBayesian probabilityScalar (mathematics)Linear modelBirth weightEconometricsRegressionStatisticsSimple linear regressionPregnancyComputer scienceMathematicsMedicineBody weightBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the importance of maternal gestational weight gain, it is not yet conclusively understood how weight gain during different stages of pregnancy influences health outcomes for either mother or child. We partially attribute this to differences in and the validity of statistical methods for the analysis of longitudinal and scalar outcome data. In this paper, we propose a Bayesian joint regression model that estimates and uses trajectory parameters as predictors of a scalar response. Our model remedies notable issues with traditional linear regression approaches found in the clinical literature. In particular, our methodology accommodates nonprospective designs by correcting for bias in self-reported prestudy measures; truly accommodates sparse longitudinal observations and short-term variation without data aggregation or precomputation; and is more robust to the choice of model changepoints. We demonstrate these advantages through a real-world application to the Alberta Pregnancy Outcomes and Nutrition (APrON) dataset and a comparison to a linear regression approach from the clinical literature. Our methods extend naturally to other maternal and infant outcomes as well as to areas of research that employ similarly structured data.

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)0.000
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 score0.142
Threshold uncertainty score0.619

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEntropySame topicBirth, Development, and HealthFrench-language works237,207