MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383877314 · doi:10.1186/s13293-023-00532-9

Sex differences in the effects of prematurity and/or low birthweight on neurodevelopmental outcomes: systematic review and meta-analyses

2023· review· en· W4383877314 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiology of Sex Differences · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsB.C. Women's Hospital & Health CentreBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaWomen's Health Research InstituteSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMedicineLow birth weightMeta-analysisModerationObservational studyBirth weightPediatricsConfoundingPremature birthGestational agePregnancyPsychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Premature birth and/or low birthweight have long-lasting effects on cognition. The purpose of the present systematic review is to examine whether the effects of prematurity and/or low birth weight on neurodevelopmental outcomes differ between males and females. METHODS: Web of Science, Scopus, and Ovid MEDLINE were searched for studies of humans born premature and/or of low birthweight, where neurodevelopmental phenotypes were measured at 1 year of age or older. Studies must have reported outcomes in such a way that it was possible to assess whether effects were greater in one sex than the other. Risk of bias was assessed using both the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and the National Institutes of Health Quality assessment tool for observational cohort and cross-sectional studies. RESULTS: Seventy-five studies were included for descriptive synthesis, although only 24 presented data in a way that could be extracted for meta-analyses. Meta-analyses found that severe and moderate prematurity/low birthweight impaired cognitive function, and severe prematurity/low birthweight also increased internalizing problem scores. Moderate, but not severe, prematurity/low birthweight significantly increased externalizing problem scores. In no case did effects of prematurity/low birthweight differ between males and females. Heterogeneity among studies was generally high and significant, although age at assessment was not a significant moderator of effect. Descriptive synthesis did not identify an obvious excess or deficiency of male-biased or female-biased effects for any trait category. Individual study quality was generally good, and we found no evidence of publication bias. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence that the sexes differ in their susceptibility to the effects of severe or moderate prematurity/low birthweight on cognitive function, internalizing traits or externalizing traits. Result heterogeneity tended to be high, but this reflects that one sex is not consistently more affected than the other. Frequently stated generalizations that one sex is more susceptible to prenatal adversity should be re-evaluated.

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.

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)0.001
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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.192
Threshold uncertainty score0.964

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.156
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.230 · 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