Genetic variation in placental insufficiency: What have we learned over time?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genetic variation shapes placental development and function, which has long been known to impact fetal growth and pregnancy outcomes such as miscarriage or maternal pre-eclampsia. Early epidemiology studies provided evidence of a strong heritable component to these conditions with both maternal and fetal-placental genetic factors contributing. Subsequently, cytogenetic studies of the placenta and the advent of prenatal diagnosis to detect chromosomal abnormalities provided direct evidence of the importance of spontaneously arising genetic variation in the placenta, such as trisomy and uniparental disomy, drawing inferences that remain relevant to this day. Candidate gene approaches highlighted the role of genetic variation in genes influencing immune interactions at the maternal-fetal interface and angiogenic factors. More recently, the emergence of molecular techniques and in particular high-throughput technologies such as Single-Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) arrays, has facilitated the discovery of copy number variation and study of SNP associations with conditions related to placental insufficiency. This review integrates past and more recent knowledge to provide important insights into the role of placental function on fetal and perinatal health, as well as into the mechanisms leading to genetic variation during development.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".