Establishing normal ranges for fetal and neonatal small and large intestinal lengths: results from a prospective postmortem study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To establish reference intervals (RIs) for fetal and neonatal small and large intestinal lengths. Methods: Linear measurements on small and large intestines were made upon postmortem examination of 131 preterm and term infants with gestational ages between 13 and 41 weeks. All cases were referred from the Eastern Ontario and Western Québec regions to a tertiary care hospital. Age and sex partitions were considered and RI limits were estimated. Results: Data consisted of 72 male (54.96%) and 59 female (45.04%) fetuses and neonates with mean gestational age of 25.6 weeks. Results showed that small and large intestinal lengths increased linearly with gestational age. RIs for small intestinal length (cm) of fetuses and neonates aged 13-20 weeks were (21.1, 122.4); of those aged 21-28 weeks were (57.7, 203.8); of those aged 29-36 weeks were (83.6, 337.1); and of those aged 37-41 weeks were (132.8, 406.4). RIs for large intestinal length (cm) of fetuses and neonates from the same four age groups were (5.1, 21.4), (12.7, 39.7), (32.4, 62.4), and (29.1, 82.2). Conclusions: Establishing accurate RIs for premature and term infants has clinical relevance for pathologists performing postmortem analysis and for surgeons planning postoperative management of patients. The results of this study reaffirm that fetal small and large intestinal lengths increase linearly with gestational age irrespective of sex. Future studies should aim to further investigate the role of possible confounders on growth of fetal intestinal length, including maternal factors such as age and substance use during pregnancy.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".