Effect of preterm birth on growth and blood pressure in adulthood in the Pelotas 1993 cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Preterm birth has been associated with increased risk of hypertension and cardiovascular disease later in adulthood, attributed to cardiovascular and metabolic alterations in early life. However, there is paucity of evidence from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). METHODS: We investigated the differences between preterm (<37 weeks gestational age) and term-born individuals in birth length and weight as well as adult (18 and 20 years) height, weight and blood pressure in the Brazilian 1993 Pelotas birth cohort using linear regressions. Analyses were adjusted for the maternal weight at the beginning of pregnancy and maternal education and family income at childbirth. Additional models were adjusted for body mass index (BMI) and birthweight. Separate analyses were run for males and females. The complete sample was analysed with an interaction term for sex. RESULTS: Of the 3585 babies included at birth, 3010 were followed up in adulthood at 22 years. Preterm participants had lower length and weight at birth. This difference remained for male participants in adulthood, but female participants were no shorter than their term counterparts by 18 years of age. At 22 years, females born preterm had lower blood pressures (systolic blood pressure -1.00 mmHg, 95%CI -2.7, 0.7 mmHg; diastolic blood pressure -1.1 mmHg, 95%CI -2.4, 0.3 mmHg) than females born at term. These differences were not found in male participants. CONCLUSIONS: In this Brazilian cohort we found contrasting results regarding the association of preterm birth with blood pressure in young adulthood, which may be unique to an LMIC.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".