MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4292115148 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1950527/v1

Early maternal risk factor profiles and their relationship to toxic stress response in infants across the first year of life

2022· preprint· en· W4292115148 on OpenAlexaff
Kameelah Gateau, Lisa J. Schlueter, Lara J. Pierce, Barbara L. Thompson, Alma Gharib, Ramón Durazo-Arvizú, Charles A. Nelson, Pat Levitt

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersSaban Research InstituteJPB FoundationHarvard University
KeywordsInfant developmentMedicineCumulative riskLongitudinal studyGestationBiomarkerPregnancyProspective cohort studyOxidative stressPediatricsChild developmentObstetricsPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyInternal medicineBiologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective: To generate a cumulative early risk score for the perinatal maternal environment and examine the association of the maternal cumulative risk score with infant development and maternal and infant oxidative stress.Study Design: This was a two-center longitudinal study of mother-infant dyads born >36 weeks’ gestation. Maternal demographic information and mental health assessments were utilized to generate cumulative risk scores. Infants’ development was assessed at 6 and 12 months. Mothers and infants were assayed for F2-isoprostanes, a biomarker of oxidative stress.Results: Cumulative risk scores predicted higher maternal (p=0.01) and infant (p=0.05) oxidative stress levels at 6 months. Early infant oxidative stress at 2 months predicted developmental scores 12 months (p=0.04). Conclusions: Perinatal risk predicted both mother and infant outcomes at six months possibly informing a sensitive period in which prospective, reliable measures reveal the physiological impact of early environmental risk.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.325 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicBirth, Development, and Health→French-language works237,207→