MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410407938 · doi:10.26502/ogr0182

Fetal Growth Chart in Twins Consistent with The FMF Growth Curve:Prospective Multicenter Study

2025· article· en· W4410407938 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hamutal Meiri, Nadav Kugler, Nataly Zilberman Sharon, Ran Svirsky, Heidy Portillo Rodriguez, Anna Goncé, Mar Bennasar, A. Borrell, Júlia Ponce, Annegret Geipel, Adeline Walter, Corinna Simonini, B Strizek, Elisa Bevilacqua, Federica Romanzi, Karl Oliver Kagan, Tanja Lennartz, Armin Bauer, Ron Maymon, K. H. Nicolaides, Yoram Louzon

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrics and Gynecology Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFetal growthGrowth curve (statistics)MedicineChartFetusEconometricsStatisticsPregnancyEconomicsMathematicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: Different retrospective growth charts for twin pregnancies debates whether twin growth is similar to singletons. Recently, the fetal medicine foundation (FMF) published a retrospective fetal growth chart that indicated similar growth charts for twins and singleton if only term delivery of both twins without major malformation are included. A national Denish growth chart confirmed these finding. We constructed prospective growth chart of estimated fetal weight (EFW) throughout pregnancy of monochorionic diamniotic (MCDA) and dichorionic (DC) twins using a multi-center, multi-national cohort. Study Design: Pregnancies with two live fetuses at 11-13 wks’ gestation were enrolled. Gestational age was determined from crown-rump length of the larger twin in the first trimester. EFW charts were made from fetal growth at 11-13, 20-22, 24-26, 28-30, 32-34, and 36-37 wks’ gestation using Hadlock-4 formula made of biparietal diameter, head and abdominal circumference, and femur length. Chorionicity specific charts were built for 376 DC and 158 MCDA live twins who were born at term, without malformations. Centers included were from Montreal, Canada, Bonn and Tubingen, Germany, Barcelona, Spain, Rome, Italy, and Zerifin, Israel. ANOVA was used to compare ethnic and centers charts and functional fit to were compared our charts to retrospective EFW charts of the FMF. Results: Growth was slower in MCDA compared with DC twins starting from 21st wks’ gestation and increased with advancing gestation. Our charts were similar but marginally slower than the FMF ones. Smaller EFW were in Barcelona and Rome compared to the larger in Bonn and Tubingen, and fetuses of white women were larger than those of other ethnicities Conclusions: We developed a prospective growth chart for pregnancies with two live DC and MCDA twins born at term without malformations that are consistent with those of the FMF, with small differences between countries and ethnicities.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.345
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetrics and Gynecology ResearchSame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207