Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To examine the association between gestational age at birth and risk of clinically diagnosed intellectual disability (ID) week by week to provide a detailed description of ID risk across the entire range of gestational ages and by severity of ID. Methods All individuals born alive in Sweden 1974–2017 were prospectively followed up from birth until 2017 using national registers. The HRs for ID according to weekly gestational age and gestational age categories were determined using Cox models. Sibling analyses were conducted to adjust for familial confounding. Results The study included 3 572 845 live births. During the follow-up, 26 596 ID cases were registered. The adjusted weekly estimates showed a gradual increase in risk of ID from week 40 to week 24 (adjusted HR37weeks=1.80 (1.74 to 1.87), aHR32weeks=3.93 (3.73 to 4.13), aHR28weeks=7.53 (6.95 to 8.16), aHR24weeks=21.58 (18.62 to 25.00)) and from week 41 onwards (aHR42weeks=1.26 (1.19 to 1.32)), with statistically significantly higher risks across the range of gestational age compared with infants born at week 40. The associations were consistent in mild, moderate and severe/profound ID but most prominent for severe/profound ID. Conclusion The risk of ID increased weekly as the date of delivery moved away from 40 weeks, both preterm and post-term. The results remained robust after detailed adjustment for confounding, including familial confounding.
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 | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.040 | 0.014 |
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".