MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392247804 · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(23)01198-4

National, regional, and global estimates of low birthweight in 2020, with trends from 2000: a systematic analysis

2024· article· en· W4392247804 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMaternal and Neonatal Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSchool of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong UniversityMedical Research CouncilHospital for Sick ChildrenGöteborgs UniversitetUniversity of WashingtonShanghai Jiao Tong UniversityInstitut National de la Santé et de la Recherche MédicaleUniversity of PretoriaSouth African Medical Research CouncilChildren's Investment Fund FoundationUNICEFBill and Melinda Gates FoundationJohns Hopkins UniversityWorld Health OrganizationKhon Kaen University
KeywordsGeographyRegional scienceDemographySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Low birthweight (LBW; <2500 g) is an important predictor of health outcomes throughout the life course. We aimed to update country, regional, and global estimates of LBW prevalence for 2020, with trends from 2000, to assess progress towards global targets to reduce LBW by 30% by 2030. METHODS: For this systematic analysis, we searched population-based, nationally representative data on LBW from Jan 1, 2000, to Dec 31, 2020. Using 2042 administrative and survey datapoints from 158 countries and areas, we developed a Bayesian hierarchical regression model incorporating country-specific intercepts, time-varying covariates, non-linear time trends, and bias adjustments based on data quality. We also provided novel estimates by birthweight subgroups. FINDINGS: An estimated 19·8 million (95% credible interval 18·4-21·7 million) or 14·7% (13·7-16·1) of liveborn newborns were LBW worldwide in 2020, compared with 22·1 million (20·7-23·9 million) and 16·6% (15·5-17·9) in 2000-an absolute reduction of 1·9 percentage points between 2000 and 2020. Using 2012 as the baseline, as this is when the Global Nutrition Target began, the estimated average annual rate of reduction from 2012 to 2020 was 0·3% worldwide, 0·85% in southern Asia, and 0·59% in sub-Saharan Africa. Nearly three-quarters of LBW births in 2020 occurred in these two regions: of 19 833 900 estimated LBW births worldwide, 8 817 000 (44·5%) were in southern Asia and 5 381 300 (27·1%) were in sub-Saharan Africa. Of 945 300 estimated LBW births in northern America, Australia and New Zealand, central Asia, and Europe, approximately 35·0% (323 700) weighed less than 2000 g: 5·8% (95% CI 5·2-6·4; 54 800 [95% CI 49 400-60 800]) weighed less than 1000 g, 9·0% (8·7-9·4; 85 400 [82 000-88 900]) weighed between 1000 g and 1499 g, and 19·4% (19·0-19·8; 183 500 [180 000-187 000]) weighed between 1500 g and 1999 g. INTERPRETATION: Insufficient progress has occurred over the past two decades to meet the Global Nutrition Target of a 30% reduction in LBW between 2012 and 2030. Accelerating progress requires investments throughout the lifecycle focused on primary prevention, especially for adolescent girls and women living in the most affected countries. With increasing numbers of births in facilities and advancing electronic information systems, improvements in the quality and availability of administrative LBW data are also achievable. FUNDING: The Children's Investment Fund Foundation; the UNDP-UNFPA-UNICEF-WHO World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction; and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.610

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.347 · 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