MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409602525 · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2025.04.041

Antenatal diagnosis of early-onset small for gestational age: absolute and relative risks of adverse outcomes

2025· article· en· W4409602525 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jessica Liauw, Sanne J. Gordijn, Wessel Ganzevoort, Chantal Mayer, Jennifer A. Hutcheon

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of CanadaCanada Research ChairsMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsMedicineObstetricsSmall for gestational ageGestational ageAdverse effectRelative riskAbsolute risk reductionPediatricsPregnancyInternal medicineConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine the absolute and relative risks of adverse maternal, perinatal, and longer-term child outcomes for pregnancies with antenatally detected early-onset small for gestational age fetuses, compared with baseline population rates. STUDY DESIGN: We linked ultrasound data from pregnancies with antenatally detected, nonanomalous, early-onset small for gestational age fetuses (estimated fetal weight and/or abdominal circumference <10th percentile at 16+0-31+6 weeks) from our tertiary referral center with provincial health and education databases. We compared risks of adverse pregnancy (eg, stillbirth, gestational hypertension/preeclampsia, cesarean section) and child outcomes (eg, infant death, intensive care unit admission, composite neonatal morbidity, cerebral palsy, Early Development Index score, and Ministry of Education special needs designation at school entry age) among pregnancies with early-onset small for gestational age fetuses to the general population of births in British Columbia, Canada. We calculated relative risks and absolute risk differences with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Among 581 pregnancies with nonanomalous early-onset small for gestational age fetuses, risk ratios for adverse pregnancy outcomes ranged from 4-fold higher for gestational hypertension/preeclampsia (95% confidence interval: 3.8-5.1) to 10-fold higher for stillbirth (95% confidence interval: 5.6-16.6), compared with the rest of the 359,602 nonanomalous births in the province. These relative risks corresponded to 16.5 per 100 excess cases (95% confidence interval: 13.1-19.8) and 2.2 per 100 excess cases (95% confidence interval: 0.9-3.6), respectively. Risks of neonatal complications were similarly elevated (eg, composite neonatal morbidity was 31-fold higher). While Ministry of Education special needs designation was 3-fold higher (95% confidence interval: 2.1-5.6), corresponding to 7 per 100 excess cases (95% confidence interval: 2.0-11.5), there was only a trend toward a higher risk of cerebral palsy. CONCLUSION: Risks of adverse maternal and childhood outcomes are elevated in pregnancies with early-onset small for gestational age fetuses. Presenting these risks in relative and absolute terms from baseline population risks may facilitate clinical counseling and risk comprehension.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and GynecologySame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207