Influence of paternal preconception health on pregnancy, intrapartum, postpartum and early childhood outcomes: protocol for a parallel scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Preconception care is the provision of behavioural, social or biomedical interventions to women and couples prior to conception. To date, preconception research has primarily focused on maternal health, despite the male partner's contribution before birth to both short-term and long-term child outcomes. The objectives of the reviews are: (1) to identify, consolidate and analyse the literature on paternal preconception health on pregnancy and intrapartum outcomes, and (2) to identify, consolidate and analyse the literature on paternal preconception health on postpartum and early childhood outcomes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A scoping review will be conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, Scopus and CINAHL databases will be searched for articles published in English. Two independent reviewers will screen titles and abstracts and then full text using Covidence, with conflicts resolved by a third reviewer. Data extraction will be performed using Covidence. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required for this scoping review. Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals as well as presented at relevant national and international conferences and meetings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".