MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297474456 · doi:10.3389/fphar.2022.904885

Medically assisted reproduction and the risk of being born small and very small for gestational age: Assessing prematurity status as an effect modifier

2022· article· en· W4297474456 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jessica Gorgui, Odile Sheehy, Jacquetta M. Trasler, Anick Bérard

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Pharmacology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health CentreUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSmall for gestational ageReproductionMedicineGestational ageObstetricsPregnancyBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the last decade, the use of medically assisted reproduction (MAR) has steadily increased but controversy remains with regards to its risks. We aimed to quantify the risk of being born small for gestational age (SGA) and very SGA (VSGA) associated with MARs overall and by type, namely ovarian stimulators (OS) and assisted reproductive technology (ART). We conducted a cohort study within the Quebec Pregnancy Cohort. Pregnancies coinciding with Quebec's MAR reimbursement PROGRAM period (2010-2014) with a singleton liveborn were considered. MAR was first defined dichotomously, using spontaneous conception as the reference, and categorized into three subgroups: OS alone (categorized as clomiphene and non-clomiphene OS), ART, OS/ART combined. SGA was defined as being born with a birth weight below the 10th percentile based on sex and gestational age (GA), estimated using populational curves in Canada, while VSGA was defined as being born with a birth weight below the 3rd percentile. We then estimated odds ratios (OR) for the association between MAR and SGA as well as VSGA using generalized estimated equation (GEE) models, adjusted for potential confounders (aOR). Two independent models were conducted considering MAR exposure overall, and MAR subgroup categories, using spontaneous conceptions as the reference. The impact of prematurity status (less than 37 weeks gestation) as an effect modifier in these associations was assessed by evaluating them among term and preterm pregnancies separately. A total of 57,631 pregnancies met inclusion criteria and were considered. During the study period, 2,062 women were exposed to MARs: 420 to OS alone, 557 to ART, and 1,085 to OS/ART combined. While no association was observed between MAR and SGA nor VSGA in the study population, MAR was associated with an increased risk for SGA (aOR 1.69, 95% CI 1.08-2.66; 25 exposed cases) among preterm pregnancies; no increased risk of SGA was observed in term pregnancies. MARs are known to increase the risk of preterm birth and our results further confirm that they also increase the risk of SGA among preterm pregnancies.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.294
Threshold uncertainty score0.505

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PharmacologySame topicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin PregnancyFrench-language works237,207